Communication Key to Successful Relationships

The Study of Communication in Relationships 1

The Study of Communication in Romance: The Key to a Successful Relationship

Winona State University


Communication in Romance: The Key to a Successful Relationship

A romantic relationship is like a garden. They can both grow, wildly and rapidly and

consist of different species and, of course, some weeds. From time to time, the weeds must be

pruned and maintained. The weeds of a relationship will sprout over time as a couple becomes

more acquainted and comfortable with each other. Bothersome habits, jealousy, boredom, and

anger can discourage a couple from staying together, especially if there is a lack of time and

emotional investment. On the contrary, if a couple is committed to stay together, their

relationship can be managedwith a proper balance of interaction and the willingness to

understand differing communication. This paper will define what a relationship is, it will then

look at the study ofGenderlect styles of men and women, and finally it will examineRelational

Dialects Theory as it is applied to relationships. It will answer the question: how can a couple

strengthen their relationship by reinforcing their verbal and nonverbal communication?

Romantic relationships can provide an important step in a person’s life. They can be very

rewarding or a discouraging experience, depending on the level of enjoyment and happiness

generated throughout a couple’s time together. Aside from happiness why do people decide to

embark on a romantic journey? It can be as simple as needing to fulfill emotional and physical

needs that are unattainable by anyone else. The ultimate goal of romantic relationships is love,

which can be subjective. In a perfect world a relationship between a boyfriend and girlfriend

would be exclusive and trustworthy. Good communication between a couple can amplify the

chances of this happening, which is a contributing factor as to why the study of communication

between boyfriends and girlfriends in a romantic relationship is beneficial and worth exploring.


An old adage claims, “men are from Mars, women are from Venus.” To fully understand the

nature of this saying in relation to communication of men and women, one may seek advice from

Tannen’s(1984) study of Genderlect styles in which she deciphers the differences in the

conversational styles of men and women. Tannen believes that men and women speak “different

words from different worlds” and has adopted the term “Genderlect” to explain that the

masculine and feminine styles of speech should be viewed as two different, but worthy, ways of

speaking. Females tend to speak in rapport talk during conversation, which fulfills their desire to

create a connection whereas men, whoare more interested in establishing their status and power

in a conversation, speak in report talk in order to command attention and win arguments. Men

use talking as a platform in which to hoist themselves above their conversational counterpart.

They tend to tell compelling jokes and stories that are meant to one up the audience, while

women tell stories about other people in order to demonstrate her unselfishness thereby

strengthening her sense of community. When women become the audience rather than the

storyteller, they hold eye contact with the speaker, nod, or interject with a cooperative overlap,

which is an interruption meant to communicate solidarity, it is used as a way to signify

understanding or invest confidence in the speaker. Because men are concerned with asserting and

retaining their power, they steer clear of signals that convey concurrence.

Genderlect styles provide insight into how men and women communicate in different

ways.They should be viewed as two different but equal ways of speaking, rather than masculine

talk being superior and feminine talk being inferior. Acquiring this knowledge can be very

beneficial in the prolonging of a successful and loving relationship. A woman’s desire for human

connection is fulfilled when she starts a relationship, however when it’s met with a man’s

competitive nature, there is bound to be conflict. While men tend to delight in competition, they


may find this communication conflict less discouraging than their female counterparts who wish

to resolve any problem. Consequently, Tannenbelieves that both men and women need to learn

to communicate in the other’s voice. She recommends that men take a dose of sensitivity in order

to effectively communicate with their girlfriends, while girlfriends try to be more assertive when

communicating with their boyfriends. When women express turmoil they are experiencing to

their boyfriends, it would be more beneficial for their boyfriends to listen and convey an

understanding rather than try and provide solutions. Showing agreement enhances the woman’s

desire for human connection. Because men wish to establish their dominance in any situation,

their significant other should refrain from telling them to do things, like running errands, as this

will compromise the male’s status and relational strain may ensue. Learning mutual

understanding will allow the two sexes togradually bridge the cross-cultural communication gap

and continue to find happiness their relationship.

Genderlect theory provides great insight in the ongoing mystery of the different

communication styles of men and women;however it does provide some implications. Tannen

does not seem to take into consideration that there is greater difference among the sexes than

between them.By categorizing the Genderlect styles of men and women, Tannen is essentially

inferring that all members of the two genders communicate the same way. She has not taken into

consideration the ways feminine men and masculine women communicate and solutions to these

gender departure inconsistencies. It is important to remember that sex is biological and gender is

socially constructed. Because of this, gender is evolving into blurred categories that now

encompass transgender, transsexual, drag king and queen, as well as many others. Tannen will

have to revise her theory and take all gender communication styles into consideration. There are

foreseeable problems that may occur if a couple were toadhere to her theory and built a


relationship on these ideas.It is unknown if the benefits would outweigh the problems, however it

is never wise to invest one’s life blindly to an abstract theory about something subjective as love.

Like a game of tug-of-war, there are constant pushes and pulls between individuals who are

trying to communicate and build a relationship with each other. Baxter and Montgomery are

theorists who research the tensions within relationships, called Relational Dialects

(1988).According to Baxter and Montgomery, conflicts are common in all relationships;

however an absence of them may cause a relationship to suffer. Although they can be

disheartening, these women agree that discussing paradoxes within a relationship may sustain it

but not bring the relationship back to its original state. Baxter and Montgomery pinpoint three

conflicts that affect relationships internally and externally, and they are: integration-separation,

stability-change, and expression-nonexpression. All dialectics must function as the yin and yang

in the relationships, for without a balance of both needs, the relationship will fail due to an

excess of conflicts. It is important for those in a relationship to remember if one side wins, the

whole relationship loses.

Integration and separation is what Baxter regards as the most central dialectic to

relationship development.It is the conflict between connectedness-separateness and inclusion-

seclusion. Meet Genevieve and Owen, two seniors in college who are in an exclusive romantic

relationship. While they both love spending time with each other, Owen wishes to spend every

free time he has with Genevieve, and Genevieve likes to have her own space occasionally when

she has a moment to spare. Genevieve must explain to Owen in a tactful way that, to his dismay,

she is unable to spend every moment with him. As stated before there are internal and external

dialectics a couple must deal with, in which the tensions must be balanced within the relationship

as well as between the couple and its community. Genevieve and Owen will have to find a way


to balance their dilemma between inclusion and seclusion with their outside world and

themselves.

The Relational Dialectic class that includes certainty-uncertainty within a relationship

and conventionality-uniqueness between a couple and society is stability and change. Like most

relationships, Genevieve and Owen have reached a point in their relationship where they have

grown tired of the same redundant activities, and desire more excitement. They must find a

happy medium in which to incorporate new and interesting activities with predictability.

Externally, it is easy for a couple to conform to social norms and incorporate relational patterns

that they have observed as being successful for other couples,additionally they must also

encompass and essence of unconventionality that will their relationship unique. This can be done

through spontaneity, inside jokes,interesting dates or trips or sexual intimacy.

The final Relational Dialectic recognized by Baxter and Montgomery is expression and

nonexpression. This dialectic includes openness and closedness, which is the tension that

requires a couple to maintain an equal amount of intimacy and privacy between and surrounding

the couple. Genevieve sustains a high level of self-disclosure with her boyfriend, while Owen

chooses to disclose less and less information about his life and feelings as their relationship

continues to evolve. While this undoubtedly irritates Genevieve, Owen’s amount of discretion is

necessary. Outside of their relationship the couple must figure out how to express to their peers

the dynamic of their relationship, while withholding personal and sacred information.

Baxter and Montgomery provide two solutions when dealing with contradictions. The

most commonly used is spiraling inversion, which contends that a couple alternates between the

contrasting poles by responding first to one dialectical pull, and then another. For example,

Genevieve and Owen can resolve their problem relating to integration and separation by agreeing


that every other night when they are free they will devote to the other person, that way

Genevieve can have her alone time while Owen can still retain the closeness he desires.

Segmentation is the other compromising practice when dealing with the negotiation of tensions.

In enacting segmentation, a couple privileges different aspects of their relationship. If Gen and

Owen were to use segmentation to solve their Relational Dialectic dilemma, they could choose to

disclose information about the progress of their relationship with family members, while

withholding information about their sexual escapades. The couple is sharing information,

without disclosing intimate details. Both spiraling inversion and segmentation are different ways

of solving the strains of relationships, but in different ways.

The idea of the constant pulls and tugs that surround relationships is the basis of the

Relation Dialectic Theory posed by Baxter and Montgomery. It makes sense that the three

dialectics provided are needed in a relationship, but because they are tailored to something as

unique as a relationship, it is hard to make generalizations. Instead of providing accurate advice

for all relationships, it requires a more heuristic approach involving trial and error.

The power of verbal communication is clearly important between boyfriends and

girlfriends. It is a vital way for two people to form a bond. Genderlect styles and Relational

Dialects are rooted firmly in verbal communication and used to further a relationship, however

nonverbal communication is equally important. Facial expressions, hand gestures and sensual

touch are all examples of nonverbal communication that are beneficial to a relationship. This

kind of communication is a heightened level of intimacy betweencouples and continues to raise

awareness of one’s emotions.

As a boyfriend and girlfriend allow themselves to become more acquainted with each

other through mutual disclosure of personal information, they will become more intimate with


each other nonverbally and a physical relationship will emerge. Prinsen and Punyanunt-Carter

(2009) conducted a study of nonverbal behaviors at different stages of relationships, which

revealed that body language, facial expression, eye contact and touch are synonymous with

verbal communication, and may even affect the way the couple talks with each other. The

researchers questioned one hundred forty-five college students and asked them to describe their

nonverbal communication in their romantic relationships. The stages of relationships varied from

student to student and ranged from casual dating, exclusively dating, long term relationship,

cohabitation while in a long-term relationship and marriage. Each of these stages have

expectations regarding how a couple should interact nonverbally with each other and what their

body language should be like while existing in that stage. The results of the study found that at

every stage of a relationship, as individuals become more familiar with each other, they tend to

touch one another more, laugh more, smile more, and stare more. The couples were also more

nonverbally expressive than those couples that were not at such an intimate level. However, the

frequency of positive body language decreases in couples when the satisfaction of the

relationship decreases. So, the amount of time spent in a relationship does not always coincide

with that amount of satisfaction. This will briefly be revisited in the next paragraph when

discussing the amount of touch initiated by males and females after marriage.

Like Genderlect styles, the research done by Prinsen and Punyanunt-Carter showed a

difference in the way men and women communicate nonverbally through touch. Women tend to

react less positively toward the touch of the opposite sexthan men do, but have a better reaction

to touch overall, than men. A study conducted by Briggs and Willis (1992) measured the

likelihood of men initiating touch before marriage compared to women. It was found that men

tend to initiate touch with their girlfriends more so before marriage and the year following while


women instigate it more frequently after a year of marriage. Some couples involved in the

research revealed that after they got married, the amount of touch dwindled down to no contact

at all. This could be a sign of trouble in a relationship. A study done by Beier and Sternberg

(1977) in which they interviewed couples to see if the amount of touch reflected on the

frequency of disagreement or agreement within the relationshipconcluded that couples who

disagreed the least touched each other more. It would be interesting to research if the amount of

touch equals agreement and happiness or vice versa.

For the married couples where the females initiated touching, it was hypothesized that

women use this type of nonverbal communication to preserve the bond with their husbands.

Women perceive touch as expressing warmth, exclusiveness and love where on the other hand,

men viewed touch to have an affectionate and sexual meaning. (Richmond, McCroskey and

Payne, 1991)Because of this data, Willis and Briggs believe the amount of touch initiated by

men decreases after marriage because prior to this they were noncommittal and used touch as a

way to secure sex. After marriage the need to secure sex decreases.

The research done surrounding nonverbal communication, mainly touch,

demonstrateshow submerged in meaning nonverbal communication is. A couple can strengthen

their relationship using nonverbal communication by tuning into what one another are expressing

without words. Both boyfriends and girlfriends should take the other’s facial expressions into

consideration. The more they see their lover smiling and laughing, the better. A couple can use

nonverbal communication to segue into effective verbal communication. When a boyfriend

detects his girlfriend’s glares or eye rolls, which signify irritability or hurt feelings, he would be

able to take these observations and create a dialogue on how to fix the situation (while being


mindful of Genderlect solutions in order to effectively communicate with each other while

resolving conflict, of course!)

Relationships are not always a bed of roses, however if a couple uses verbal and nonverbal

communication effectively they can get rid of the thorns that prevent their relationship from

evolving. With the knowledge Genderlect styles and Relational Dialectics, boyfriends and

girlfriends are more likely to understand each other. They will also be able to maintain conflicts

better, which are sure to arise as they become more acquainted. Being aware of these theories

will increase the likelihood that a boyfriend and girlfriend’s romantic relationship will come up

roses!


Bibliography

Baxter, L.A. & Ebert, L.A. (1999). Perceptions of dialectical contractions in turning points of

development in heterosexual romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal

Relationships.16(5), 547-569.

Beier, E.G. & Sternberg, D.P (1977). Marital communication: Subtle cues between newlyweds.

Journal of Communication, 27, 92-103.

Briggs, L.F. & Willis, F.N. Jr. (1992). Relationship and touch in public settings. Journal of

Nonverbal Behavior, 16, 55-63.

Lusk, Holly Michelle, “A Study of Dialectical Theory and its Relation to Interpersonal

Relationships” (2008). University of Tennessee Honors Thesis Projects.

http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_chhanhonoproj/1206

Johnson, K.L. & Edwards, R. (1991). The effects of gender and type of romantic touch on

perceptions of relational commitment. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 15, 43-55.

Prinsen, T. &Punyanunt-Carter N.M. (2009). The differences in nonverbal behaviors and how

it changes in different stages of a relationship. Texas Speech Communication Journal, 1-7.

Richmond, V.P, McCroskey, J.C., & Payne, S.K. (1991). Nonverbal behavior in interpersonal relations,

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Communication Key to Successful Relationships

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to Communication Key to Successful Relationships

Similar to Communication Key to Successful Relationships (20)

Communication Key to Successful Relationships