Relational Dialectics Theory

Relational dialectics theory (RDT) is a dialogic theory of interpersonal and family communication. RDT is grounded in the work of Russian cultural theorist Mikhail Bakhtin. Extending Bakhtin's theory of dialogism, RDT offers a relationally oriented dialogic theory grounded in a skepticism of monologue. RDT recognizes the monologic potential inherent within family communication; however, RDT critiques these monologic tendencies, favoring instead a dialogic sense in which a cacophony of multiple perspectives struggles to be heard as the family makes—and remakes—meaning. This chapter discusses foundational RDT concepts, including the utterance, the utterance chain, the centripetal-centrifugal struggle of competing discourses, unfinalizability, and the continuum of interplay. The concept of the utterance chain concretizes Bakhin's central argument that utterances do not exist in isolation; rather, utterances are always in dialogue with both prior and anticipated future utterances. To continue the conversation, the chapter suggests that scholars make more productive use of the proximal sites on the utterance chain.

Relational Dialectics is a theory that highlights and centers on contradictions taking place in everyday communicative activities between relational partners. In this study, the theory is utilized to scrutinize how parents and their children with mental health problems craft meanings from the struggle of different, often opposing discourses. The theory is aided by Contrapuntal Analysis, a type of discourse analysis which evaluates the utterance chain and interplay of discourses presented by relational dyads. The utterance chain showcases two types of links: 1) the proximal-already- spoken links which are classified as the utterances that are expressed by a relational other, and 2) the proximal-not- yet-spoken links which are classified as the utterances that are implied or not expressed. On the other hand, the interplay of discourses exhibits how voices or meanings are dominant or centripetally positioned, or marginalized or centrifugally positioned. Among the discursive struggles present between parents and their children with mental health problems are connection-autonomy, certainty-uncertainty, closedness-openness, and mental health as valued-mental health as neglected. Further, other discursive struggles emerge such as overprotection – tough love which is comprised of proximal-already-spoken utterance links and are positioned centripetally, and lack of concern – giving back to the care-providing other which includes proximal-not-yet-spoken utterance links and are positioned centrifugally. As the study capitalizes in analyzing discourses through a sociolinguistic lens, results are beneficial both for linguists and language educators in adopting English or any language courses which are suitable and relevant to address societal issues among familial contexts or within personal relationships.

Type 2 diabetes is a contradictory chronic illness that needs to be managed in cooperation with health care professionals. Despite the significant role of the professional-patient relationship in diabetes management, the meaning of this relationship as part of diabetes management has not yet been studied. The aim of this qualitative study is to describe the competing discourses of professional-patient relationships in type 2 diabetes management. As a background theory, the study applied the relational dialectics theory (RDT) 2.0 by analyzing discourses in patients’ interpersonal communication experiences with health care professionals. Overall, 63 experiences were analyzed using contrapuntal analysis. According to the results, both the patients’ positive and negative descriptions were connected to three struggling discourses: 1) having the right to care versus deserving care, 2) guidance versus control, and 3) personalization versus standardization. These discourses offered new perspectives to clarify and strengthen the role of professional-patient relationships in type 2 diabetes management.

ABSTRACTThis article argues that contrapuntal analysis and intersectional analysis are particularly germane for realizing the emergent critical turn in interpersonal and family communication studies. Contrapuntal analysis is apropos for examining the multiple discourses and intersectional analysis for examining the embodied vectors of difference at play in contemporary interpersonal and familial communicative life. I organize my discussion of the promise of contrapuntal and intersectional methods around the four shifts espoused in the Critical Interpersonal and Family Communication (CIFC) framework. The CIFC framework calls for attention to power, bidirectionality between private and public realms, critique/resistance/transformation of the status quo in the service of social-justice ends, and author reflexivity.

Despite the prevalence of children in need of adoption from the U.S. foster care system, only one of every 28 individuals who contact an adoption agency adopt from foster care. In response, adoption professionals create photolistings to maximize the pool of available prospective adoptive families and enhance the visibility of fostered youth. Yet, creating photolistings is challenging because professionals must navigate helping to place children without exploiting or misrepresenting them. Framed by relational dialectics theory, a contrapuntal analysis of 104 photolistings examined the discursive tensions of what it means to be an “adoptable” child. Findings revealed three discourses that constitute meaning: (1) discourse of child as unadoptable, (2) discourse of child as special, and (3) discourse of child as typical. The findings illustrate triadic interplay of all three discourses, wherein framing a child as special and/or typical counters culturally pervasive and damaging assumptions that fostered youth might be unadoptable or less adoptable than other children. Theoretical, methodological, and practical applications are discussed.

The U.S. foster care system aims to provide care to children who are unable to live safely with their families of origin. Yet, fostered youth endure negative experiences before, during, and after foster care. This study investigates tensions between stated goals and experiences of foster care, from the perspective of (formerly) fostered youth. Framed by relational dialectics theory, contrapuntal analysis of 32 narrative interviews revealed two discourses that construct meaning of the foster care system: (1) Discourse of System as (a Necessary) Good aligned with stated goals, constructing the system as helpful and (2) Discourse of System as Harmful (but Necessary) competed with assumptions that foster care is helpful, constructing the system as broken. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

The authors used relational dialectics theory (RDT 2.0) to frame a collaborative autoethnography based on a year of their e-mail exchanges to show how romantic dyads use discourse to conceptualize themselves and their relationships. They used collaborative autoethnography (CAE) as a method to connect feminist inquiry with a critique of traditional interpersonal communication research. The use of found poetry/poetic transcription illustrates the antagonistic discourses of (a) intellect versus embodiment, (b) real-life work versus other worlds, (c) balance versus giving everything, and (d) past relationships versus the present. The RDT analysis demonstrated a conflict between feminist ethics, individual identities, and romantic narratives that contributed to a conflicted relational culture. This autoethnography suggests the utility of this type of text for RDT and the examination of discursive struggles of identity and intimacy crafted jointly in relational discourse.

Research on ostracism overwhelmingly suggests that being ostracized is a painful experience. Much of this research comes from the field of psychology and uses various adaptations of the Cyberball experiment to specifically examine the effects of being ostracized through the Temporal Model of ostracism. As a result, there is much less understanding about how ostracism is communicated interpersonally, the interpretive process of receiving an ostracism message, or the antecedent communication conditions that allow someone to recognize various cues as ostracism. Thus, the purpose of this manuscript was twofold. The first goal was to conduct an extensive review of literature to reveal the discrepancies, variations, and disunity of the operationalization and conceptualization of ostracism related terminology across disciplines and to show how such a landscape has made it difficult for communication scholars to study ostracism as communication. The second goal was to propose a new terminology, interpersonal ostracism messages (IOMs), and to define it in order to fill this gap. By using Expectancy Violations Theory and Relational Dialectics Theory, we further shape the definition of IOMs so that communication researchers can begin focusing on ostracism as an interpersonal communication phenomenon and begin looking beyond the psychological effects of being ostracized.

ABSTRACTTo date, little is known about how gay male parents discursively create and sustain family identity and how they position themselves in relation to the dominant heteronormative discourses of the traditional family. Framed relational dialectics theory – this study explored the meaning(s) of family and fatherhood in married gay fathers’ relational talk. I interviewed 13 married gay parent dyads and conducted follow-up interviews to collect data across time as well as member check initial results. Using contrapuntal analysis, I identified the discourses of traditional family structure and nontraditional family structure at play. I argue that the couples’ talk reflected discursive struggles to generate relational meanings for their family identities.

While definitions of close relationships impact older individuals' self-identity and feelings of aging (Hummert, 1990, 1994), little is known about how older parents socially construct the relational changes that occur with their adult children in late life. Therefore, this study used Relational Dialectics Theory to identify the cultural and relational discourses older parents invoke to make meaning of relational changes with their adult children. Among other findings, our study found that participants emphasized independence and openness by engaging in a single-voiced monologue. Additionally, participants gave voice to a discursive struggle between anticipating death and sustaining life by engaging in (a) hidden polemical interplay, (b) antagonistic struggles, and (c) aesthetic moments. Implications and areas for future research are discussed.

Leveraging arts-based pedagogy, this interpersonal and/or family communication activity allows students to engage creatively with a concept of the instructor’s choosing through the creation of a collective poem. Each student contributes statements that the instructor forms into a poem, resulting in a collaborative artifact that engages students’ affective and cognitive understanding of the subject. By the end of the activity, students should be able to analyze the diverse ways people experience and interpret the concept, and they should explain how ideas in the poem confirm or challenge previous course content. This adaptable exercise helps break down barriers to participation, and the final poem illuminates the complexity of the chosen concept, yielding dynamic discussion. Courses: Instructors can implement this activity in a variety of classes, including Family Communication, Relational Communication, Introduction to Interpersonal Communication, and Advanced Interpersonal Communication. Objectives: Through the creation of a collective poem, students reflect on and discuss their experiences with an interpersonal and/or family communication concept of the instructor’s choosing. By the end of the activity, students should be able to write two statements about the concept from their own experience, interpret a collective poem that the instructor creates from these statements, and analyze and compare diverse meanings of the concept in the poem. Finally, students should be able to explain how ideas in the collective poem confirm or challenge previous ideas from the course. This activity results in a collaboratively constructed artifact. Instructors may modify the exercise for traditional, online, and hybrid courses to enhance discussions about a myriad of concepts.

What is the context in which the transition from heterosexual marriage to partnering with a woman becomes possible? Feminist postmodern theory provides the theoretical foundation for this research project, which examines the dominant binary discourse in sexual identities, the nature of heterosexuality, and the cultural context that both facilitates and inhibits this transition. Autoethnography is the research methodology employed, which affords the ability to be both subject and researcher. As such, the researcher moves between personal narrative and the cultural landscape and then back again, highlighting the roles of language and the dominant cultural discourses. Ideas considered 'normal' or 'natural' such as heterosexuality, the binary construction of sexual identity and what constitutes healthy child development are deconstructed and reconsidered. Results indicate that the dualistic binary construction of sexual identities, steeped in the theory of biological essentialism, is still a very powerful and privileged cultural narrative. The limitations of dualistic thinking are elucidated as they relate to the dichotomous hetero/homo depiction of both individuals and families. The categories of heterosexuality and homosexuality can best be understood as bodies of knowledge, rather than as static entities. This research reveals the presence of an additional narrative, that of sexual fluidity for women, which has not become integrated into the dominant discourses. Heteronormativity and heterosexism are ubiquitous and pervasive facets of the cultural context; heterosexuality remains the dominant and privileged mode of relating, the standard against which 'others' are measured. This has hampered both theory and research by exerting pressure for individuals and families to assimilate to heterosexual norms. It has further inhibited theorizing about the presence and impact of heterosexual privilege in the marriage and family therapy literature. The words marriage and family are central to of one of the most fiercely debated issues of our time. At stake is the very definition of marriage: Who controls the definition, and for what purpose? Due to the pervasive cultural climate of heteronormativity, implications for the field of marriage and family therapy include the need to actively re-define marriage as inclusive of gay and lesbian couples. Future directions for research are discussed.

In this essay, I briefly review some of the methodological concerns and theoretical opportunities that exist when researchers use quantitative methods to analyze dyadic data. First, I review three fundamental concepts inherent to dyadic data analysis. I then discuss three dyadic data designs that are commonly employed within family and interpersonal communication. After highlighting the two most common statistical techniques that researchers use to analyze dyadic data (i.e., multilevel and structural equation modeling), I address some of the theoretical opportunities that exist when family communication scholars shift their thinking away from the individual to the dyad. I conclude with an exhortation to use dyadic data to help advance our theoretical understandings of both the relational and systemic dynamics that animate family interaction.

Background: Although social norms are thought to play an important role in hepatitis B screening behaviors, limited theoretical or empirical guidance exists on how the underlying process works. Using the theory of normative social behavior (TNSB), we examined the role played by injunctive norms and interpersonal discussion in the relationship between descriptive norms and hepatitis B screening behavior among Asian Americans. Methods: Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese Americans in the Washington D.C.-Baltimore metropolitan area (N=877) were recruited from community-based organizations. Self-administered baseline surveys collected information on their demographic, social norms (e.g., descriptive and injunctive norms), interpersonal communication, and HBV screening behavior. Results: Social norms and family communication emerged as key factors in HBV screening. For Vietnamese Americans, family communication moderated the influence of descriptive norms on behavior. Injunctive norm moderated the influence of descriptive norms on behavior among Korean Americans. However, there was no significant interaction for Chinese Americans. Discussion: Family communication and social Snorms are integral in enabling Asian Americans to have HBV screening and warrant sensitivity in the design of liver cancer prevention program in this high risk group of Asian Americans. Citation Format: Hee-Soon Juon, Rajiv Rimal, Sunmin Lee. Social norms, family communication, and hepatitis B screening among Asian Americans. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Ninth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2016 Sep 25-28; Fort Lauderdale, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2017;26(2 Suppl):Abstract nr C72.

ABSTRACTA critical turn is currently taking place in interpersonal and family communication (IFC) studies, thereby reorienting the predominantly post-positivist, rationalist, and individualist sensibilities that have long characterized the sub-field. However, questions remain about what counts – or not – as critical interpersonal and family communication (CIFC) inquiry. In this review essay, we first critique historical definitions of IFC. Second, we characterize the few recent instances of meta-communication about CIFC as lacking a coherent vision. Third, we distinguish IFC from CIFC in terms of study topics and metatheoretical commitments. Fourth, we advocate for a more inclusive yet nuanced understanding of what counts by delimiting CIFC studies as a multiplicity of politics. Finally, we offer future recommendations for this area of inquiry.