Uncertainty Reduction Critique
Why do dogs sniff one another?
A Critique
of
Charles Berger's
Uncertainty Reduction Theory
by Kevin O'Reilly
The question, "why do dogs sniff one another?", may sound a little silly, but their actions become quite interesting if we compare them to human communication. What are dogs doing when they so often stop on the sidewalk to trade whiffs? Are they "uncertain" of one another?
When we change the topic to humans we must acknowledge that most of us don't spend the first moments with a stranger smelling around.
However, everyday we encounter different levels of uncertainty with whom the people we interact and we "use symbols instead of smells to reach our conclusions"(Griffin 153).
When I enter one of my classes for the first time I am uncertain of many things. Is this professor going to be easy or hard? Are they going to be interesting?
Charles Berger's Ucertainty Reduction Theory is based on human communication being used to gain knowledge and create understanding(Griffin 153). His eight axioms are his biblical beliefs and he corrolates them to agree with the seven key variables of relationship developement: verbal output, nonverbal warmth, information seeking, self-disclosure, reciprocity, similarity, and liking(Griffin 154).
I believe the Uncertainty Reduction Theory fits the Scientific Theory standards found in Griffins A First Look At Communication Theory and this is how I will approach my critique of Berger's Uncertainty Reduction Theory.
Explanation of Data
The Explanation of Data aspect of the Scientific Theory focuses on the organization of the theory in question. Does the theory bring light to an otherwise confusing topic? Is the theory clear of unconsequintial information? Finally, does the theory give a reason why?
In my opinion Berger's Uncertainty Reduction Theory follows all of these guidlines. First, his theory is enlightening on the concept of strangers first encounter together. At first I didn't believe it was a subject worth being concerned, however after reading some of his beliefs on the subject I feel there is a unique pattern of feelings occuring in everyone placed in that situation.
I agree that our primary concern in a confrontational situation is to reduce the uncertainty of ourselves and the confronting party. When I'm in conversation with another person I am wihtout a doubt wondering what they are thinking, striving to increase my knowledge about them.
Predicting
Berger believes his theory, backed by his eight axioms, is always going to be factual. I don't think so! I'm sorry Charles but how can you be absolutely certain in all situaitons.
Berger created his axioms with the same thought process that a mathmetician would use to invent a equation. If a=b, and b=c, then a=c. This equation works with numbers and letters but complications arise if you make humans the variables.
In axiom 3 Berger notes that "High levels of uncertainty cause increases in information-seeking behavior. As uncertainty levels decline, information-seeking behavior decreases."
Berger is trying to use the equation again but this just doesn't make sense with so many different types of people. I feel if I were in a situation where I found someone interesting after my uncertainty levels declined, I would be inclined to gain more information from that person.
Simplicity
Is Berger's Uncertainty Reduction Theory simple? Berger's main belief behind his theory is that he wants people to "make sense", as he puts it.
looking at his eight axioms as self-evident truths I conclude that they are simple and lack ambiguous terminology. Yet, because they are so simple they are incorrect. Berger is forming a predjudice saying that every human being on this earth will think and act the way he has describe in his axioms.
I just find it hard to believe anything is that definite, especially a theory of communications. I'm not saying I know for fact his axioms are wrong, on the contrary I'm just saying that I doubt they are correct 100% of the time.
Testable Hypotheses
I believe Berger's Uncertainty Reduction Theory is testable. One possible way to test his theory would be to set up an experiment involving participants to go on a blind date.
This blind date would construct the playing field for Berger's theory. The participants would be questioned(surveyed) after the date ended and reveal their levels of uncertainty, if they were any.
The testing could continue on and question the validity of the eight axioms. For example, Joe and Sheri took place in the experiment of the blind date.
When Joe made the statement, "I traveled the world when I was in the Peace Corp", Sheri became more certain of who Joe is. Later the experimenter could ask Sheri if when she became more certain of who Joe was because he was a part of the Peace Corp, did she desire to seek more information or less. This question directly relates back to axiom 3.
If she sought less then the axiom holds true, but if she sought more information then I foresee problems with axiom 3.
Utility
Dealing with any theory we must be insightful to use it if the theory applies to us, and to disregard it if does not(Griffin 38).
It's my belief that Berger's Uncertainty Reduction Theory can be used positively. The eight axioms can be a resourceful way to reflect upon a case of initial communication with another person.
Now that you have read about Uncertainty Reduction, take a look and see its comparison to Social Penetration.
To return to home click
To check out the Research Report page click
To check out the Examples and Applications page click
To check out some Useful Links click
Griffin, Em. A First Look at Communication Theory, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. New York, c1997.
This web site was created by Kevin O'Reilly(ko390997@oak.cats.ohiou.edu) and was last updated 2/4/00.