A Rose by Any Other Name Is Still a Rose: A Comparative Analysis of Reticence, Communication Apprehension, Unwillingness to Communicate, and Shyness

Abstract

Theorists claim that reticence, communication apprehension, unwillingness to communicate. and shyness are different problems, but the interrelationships among those constructs has not been systematically explored. The purpose of this paper is to examine theoretical assumptions underlying these four constructs regarding the nature of the problem, how it is identified, its etiology, and proposed solutions. This analysis reveals that the four labels do not denote four discrete problems; rather, the constructs overlap to a great extent. A systematic interview in conjunction with self-report scales is recommended as the means of identification of the problem, since present methods do not provide a precise account of the specific nature of individual difficulties. The particular treatment used should depend on the exact nature of the problem as it is reported by the individual, rather than applying one specific mode of treatment in every case.In recent years there has been a flurry of interest in a communication disorder encompassing several speech-related difficulties, including anxiety about, avoidance of, and ineptitude at communicating. A variety of labels has appeared in speech communication and social psychology literature, particularly reticence (

Explication and Test of a Cognitive Model of Communication Apprehension: A New Look at an Old Construct

“…A second implication of the approach taken here concerns distinctions that have been proposed among various constructs, such as communication apprehension, reticence, unwillingness to communicate, and shyness (Kelly, 1982;McCroskey, 1980McCroskey, , 1981Page, 1980;Phillips, 1980). These distinctions are typically predicated upon presumed differences in causes of dysfunctional reactions.…”

The relationship between unwillingness to communicate and family communication patterns

“…The general tendency to approach or avoid communicative interaction has been conceptualized in various ways (Burgoon, 1976;Kelly, 1982;Leary, 1983;McCroskey, 1977). One such approach is the unwillingness to communicate construct or the tendency to devalue communication with others (Burgoon, 1976).…”

“…Researchers have found the dimensions of unwillingness to communicate to be related to other approach-avoidance constructs such as touch avoidance (Martin & Anderson, 1993), argumentativeness (Infante & Rancer, 1982), and communication apprehension (Burgoon & Hale 1983b;Kelly, 1982). Given that the reward dimension of the UTC reflects the degree to which people have a general tendency to seek out others for opinions or conversation, and the approach-avoidance dimension reflects the degree to which people may feel anxiety or fears about communicating, there should be a relationship between reward and approach-avoidance dimensions of the UTC and reports of communication patterns in specific contexts such as the family.…”

Willingness to communicate and employee success in U.S. organizations

“…In attempting to synthesize research stemming from the various conceptual orientations, authors have gone so far as to suggest all of the researchers are talking about the same thing (Glaser, 1981;Kelly, 1982). This conclusion definitely is incorrect and has led to oversimplification and serious error.…”