UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION THEORY

1
UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION THEORY

• Of Charles Berger

2
BASIC IDEAS

• New relationships involve uncertainty
• Communication reduces uncertainty
• Motivation to reduce uncertainty increases where
• -we expect continued interaction
• -there are strong incentives
• -where the other is deviant
• in some way.

3
TYPES OF UNCERTAINTY

• Behavioral uncertainty (how to behave?) usually
  taken care of following accepted conventions or
  protocol
• Cognitive uncertainty (who is this person?)
  usually taken care of by acquiring more
  information about the other
• Bergers 8 axioms (see next slides) can be paired
  to produce 28 theorems

4
Bergers axioms (1-4)

• Verbal commn reduces uncertainty and increases
  verbal commn
• Nonverbal warmth reduces uncertainty, increases
  nonverbal warmth
• Uncertainty causes information-seeking as
  certainty increases, information-seeking declines
• High uncertainty reduces intimacy

5
Bergers axioms (4-8)

• 5. High uncertainty produces high reciprocity
• 6.Similarities between people reduce
• uncertainty
• 7. Decreases in uncertainty produce increases in
  liking
• 8. Shared communication networks reduce
  uncertainty

6
The Theorems

• By pairing different axioms, Berger produces 28
  theorems e.g.
• Theorem 21 similarity reduces uncertainty and
  reduced uncertainty increases liking therefore,
  similarity and liking are positively related
• Theorem 17 combines axioms 3 (high uncertainty
  increases information-seeking)7 ( decreased
  uncertainty increases liking) and says that the
  more you like people the less you will seek
  information about them)

7
Strategies to Cope with Uncertainty

• Social interaction is guided by peoples overall
  strategies mental representations of action
  sequences
• Strategies become more concrete over time
• Strategies include contingency plans for when
  things dont work out
• Hedging our bets increases plan complexity,
  requiring high mental effort

8
Strategies to reduce uncertainty

• 1.Seeking information observation, asking third
  party, talking face-to-face
• 2.Choosing plan complexity (level of detail,
  number of contingency or fall-back plans)
• Hedging, providing ways for both parties to save
  face e.g. through ambiguity or humor
• Amending plans (at lower levels, first of all)

9
Critique (1)

• Certain theorems flawed 17
• Some axioms are flawed 3 and 7
• Assumption that uncertainty reduction is
  important in early encounters has been
  challenged predicted outcome value may be more
  important in explaining early commn. But Berger
  says you have to reduce uncertainty in order to
  predict outcome values.

10
Critique (2)

• Theory assumes fixed self, whereas
  constructionists would argue that in reducing
  uncertainty the self is changed
• Assumes communication is very informational in
  content
• Theory is insufficiently intercultural