Rational actors: Channel selection and rational choices in romantic conflict episodes

Abstract

The proliferation of communication technologies creates many questions about these tools’ relational uses and effects. Rational Actor Theory posits that individuals consider the benefits and costs of using a channel for communicating a particular message. This study applied Rational Actor Theory to individuals’ ( N = 129) channel choices during conflict episodes in their romantic relationships. Results indicated that partners using both integrating and avoiding conflict styles prefer face-to-face channels, while people using dominating styles prefer computer-mediated channels. Channel choice for conflict was not predicted by relationship length, type, or satisfaction. Only integrating and obliging conflict styles predicted relationship satisfaction.

Room for interpretation

“…A 2010 study found that nearly two-thirds of participants had used a mediated channel (e.g., text messaging, phone, instant messenger (IM), social network sites (SNS), email) during a conflict with their partner, with text messaging and phone being the most common [5]. Moreover, a 2013 market research report found that 30% of 16-to 24-year-olds and 12% of adults in the UK felt it was acceptable to have an argument via private text-based communications [17].…”

“…Recent studies indicate, however, that couples use a host of communication technologies for managing conflicts (e.g., [5], [23]). Given the myriad differences between mediated and FtF communication, communication channel likely influences the nature of romantic couple conflict.…”

"Back and forth, back and forth"

“…In fact, previous research suggests that individuals prefer to use mediated channels of communication in face-threatening contexts [20], including conflict resolution [28]. Yet, the rationale behind these choices has either not been explored [28] or been limited to identifying practical reasons such as proximity (spatial distance preventing FtF interaction), technological advances (aspects of CMC that made it superior to FtF), and convenience or ease of use [9]. It may be that there are other reasons why individuals manage a conflict in CMC rather than FtF.…”

24. The transformation of everyday talk: The impact of communication technology on notions of communication competence

“…A small percentage of Coyne et al's (2011) participants reported using texting in particular when initiating confrontational interactions, and Yates and Lockley (2008) found that texting was used to engage in communication with a strong potential for face loss. Similarly, Frisby and Westerman (2010) found that almost two-thirds of their study participants used mediated channels to engage in conflict communication with their romantic partners, and some reported that they chose CMC because of technological advantages for engaging in conflict. Although studies indicate that using texting or other media for conflict and serious discussions is often perceived as inappropriate or as producing misunderstanding (Kelly et al 2012b;Miller-Ott, Kelly, and Duran 2012), Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services Authenticated Download Date | 10/10/15 6:05 PM it is clear that everyday deep talk occurs via mediated channels and may enable such talk by making individuals feel sufficiently comfortable to engage.…”