No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to code the communication behaviourof married couples asked to have a pleasant conversation with one another. Fifty-one couples participated in this experiment. These couples were categorised into one of five basic mamage patterns: Traditionals. Independents, Separates, Separate/ Traditionals and Mixed type couples. The middle four minutes of their interaction was coded using the Verbal Response Modes (Stiles, 1978a). The casual interaction styles of these couples differed from one another on an utterance by utterance basis as well as in reference to the three major interpersonal roles: acquiescence, presumptuousness and attentiveness.Scholars across a variety of academic disciplines are becoming increasingly interested in examining the initiation, maintenance and dissolution of a variety of different types of relationships. A central concern of this effort is the development of taxonomies of relationships that can serve as a firm descriptive base for subsequent work (Hinde, 1979). In the study of marriage, a relatively comprehensive way to approach the classification of marital relationships is that of Fitzpatrick who has developed a typology of relational definitions (Fitzpatrick, 1976(Fitzpatrick, , 1977Fitzpatrick &Best, 1979;Fitzpatrick, Fallis & Vance, 1982;Fitzpatrick & Indvik, 1982). This typology is based on a number of dimensions reported by couples as important aspects of their ongoing relationship.There are three basic dimensions used to categorise couples in this typology. The first is aictonornylinterdependence. Although close relationships are said to be marked by a growing sense of interdependence (Levinger, 1977), the problem of how to achieve a satisfying degree of connectedness (Bochner, 1976;Hess & Handel, 1959) is generally acknowledged as a basic problem in all human relationships. Each spouse tries to cast the relationship in a form that represents the ways in which he or she wants to be together and yet satisfies each one's need to be apart. This issue of relational connectedness is examined by the amount of sharing E61-927X/81/@/O I -15 502.50i'O Q 1951 hi.

This study focuses on those features of organizations and individuals that are associated with the development of romantic relationships among employees.Likelihood of romantic involvement was found to be negatively related to formalization and curvilinearly related to organizational size. Neither participativeness nor climate were associated with organizational romance. In addition, the data showed that women who were younger, newer, and of lower rank were most likely to enter into a relationship. Education was positively related to likelihood of romance for males, but not for females.In the last decade, women have been entering the laboring force in record numbers (US. Bureau of the Census, 1984). This development has virtually guaranteed an increase in the amount of interaction that takes place between males and females in the work place. In light of the fact that, under most circumstances, interaction produces attraction (Homans, 1950, p. 112), it seems reasonable to expect that people will be more likely to become romantically involved with fellow employees. Quinn (1977, p. 30) has gone so far as to suggest that organizations are "a natural environment for romantic relationships." Surprisingly, very little solid empirical evidence exists regarding the development and maintenance of intimate relationships among organizational members (Burrell, 1984; the sole exception may be Quinn, 1977). What is available leans toward managerial tactics for eliminating "the problem" rather than seeking to understand the James P. Dillard (Ph.D., Michigan State University, 1983) is assistant professor of communication at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Hal Witteman (M.A., West Virginia University, 1976) is a doctoral candidate in communication at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. The authors would like to thank Chris Segrin, Eric Quandt, and Ione Stroup for their assistance throughout the project, and Malcolm Parks for comments on an earlier version of this article. o 1985 International Communication Assn.99

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract