Uncertainty Reduction Theory

Think back to the first day in your new class or the first day at your new  job? Almost peeping in the door you ask yourself, “Do I know anyone here”? After you have scanned the room and no familiar faces are present you may look for a seat next to a friendly face. How will this stranger and I get along ? Could we even become friends? These are some of the questions that may come to mind.

Whenever we meet new people it is never clear to us how we should act towards them. The Uncertainty Reduction theory understands that there will be some sense of incertitude with primary encounters. Charles Berger, a pioneer in this theory asserts that in these first encounters the goal or primary concern is to reduce the amount of uncertainty or increase the predictability of the other persons behaviour. The way to do this to find out more about the other person. Knowing that you may will be in that class for the entire semester or working closely with this person, realising that they have notes that you want or that they act strangely drives us to want to reduce or mitigate uncertainty (know more about them).

The premise of this theory is that we have a need to predict and explain. In other words we want to know why this person is behaving that way. For Berger, when meet someone for the first time we are faced with either behavioural or cognitive questions. So as you  are about to engage the stranger next to you in class or the workplace, you may have asked yourself, “Should I say hi, hey or good morning?” “Should we shake hands?” “Do I ask about their field of study or their position in the company?” These are behavioural questions. Does this person enjoy this class or their work? Do they have a lot of friends? What type of music do they enjoy? These are considered cognitive questions.

In order to explain the link between his theory about uncertainty and the core aspects of relationship developement, Berger suggested these axioms (self-evident truths) : verbal communication, non verbal warmth , information seeking,self disclosure, reciprocity, similarity, liking and shared networks.

So according to Berger the relationship between you and that person you sat next to in your new class should go like this.

Your first interaction may be awkward but in conversation that person say things about them and this makes you more at ease. The more and more the two of you speak the more comfortable you become thus sparking even more conversation. Now so at ease the both of you will give more non verbal cues like nodding in agreement, smiling, eye contact etc.

The lingering cognitive questions in the beginning compel you to want to know more about this person. As that person tells you about their favourite television programs family pets or voices their displeasure with the UWI shuttle service your uncertainty about this person decreases. The more you think you that person, the more your urge to find out more about them decreases.

It is probable that in your first conversation that you would not have revealed your deepest darkest secrets. However the more you talk with this person the more you feel as though you can predict their responses thus you will reveal more about yourself.As you relate more of your experiences that person feels compelled to relate more of their experiences.

By the eighth  week of class you feel like you know this person well. You find out that you both like reality TV and romantic movies. These similarities between make you even more at ease with this person. The more you come to know about this classmate the more you like her. You realise that you have some friends in common ( not only on Facebook ). Knowing this makes you feel as though you have a better understanding of who that person is.

While most of these axioms and some of the theorems (a proposition that logically and necessarily follows two axioms)  almost accurately depict how interpersonal relationships develop, there are some that just do not apply to the real world. For instance axiom 3 which states that the lack of knowledge about a person drives them to find out more about that person. How many of you have decided to engage random people or “Facebook stalk” them on a whim. It is more probable that you would only seek information about if you wanted to not just because.

Theorem 17 the combination of axiom 3 and 7 is also objectionable. According to this theory the more you like person the less things you want to know about them . So how would Berger explain my best friend of over 15 years prattling on for hours about the new developments in our lives? This theorem is also suggesting that one would seek information about and from person they dislike. Would you really be interested in your that annoying girl in class’ favourite colour?

Berger also asserts that we communicate with others to achieve certain goals and that we are always making strategic mental plans to guide our social interaction. (Yes, we may very well be that calculated). Being a university student your main goal is to do well in all classes and this new class is no exception. Your motivation behind engaging the stranger you sat next to could be because you would like a friend in the class that will share their notes with you if you miss class or be your study partner as they seem to be the smartest person in class. To reach your goal you may decide on building a relationship with them as your overall strategy. You will be friendly, polite, as helpful as you can be to them and you could also show that you are a good student. All these things may encourage them to want to get to know you better and eventually become friends with you.

As you are still unsure about this person you do not know the type of reaction that you will get in response to your messages. In order to reduce this uncertainty and mitigate the risks involved you may deploy these strategies.

To find how this person will respond you could use a passive strategy like observing them from a distance. (Social media stalking may be applicable here). Also you could opt for a more active strategy such as asking fellow classmates about this person. You must also realise that this could be biased information, so an interactive strategy might be more effective. So just have a face-to-face conversation with them and interrogate them  ask specific questions.

It is important to decide how complex you want the message to be. It is important that you pass that course so you will most likely have a plan A,B,C and D if the original plan does not work. However you still do not know this person very well so you may make a relatively simple plan and see how it goes from there. In addition to that, using a complex plan will require greater mental effort and there is a risk that verbal and nonverbal fluency will deteriorate during the course of the conversation. This may cause you to lose credibility in the eyes of this person.

Despite the flaws of the theory and the criticism of other communication scholars the theory which is located in the socio-psychological tradition, is still considered a scientific theory. It explains the “concept” of uncertainty during primary interactions and out need to lessen it. There are specific testable predictions and the theorems are not complex in nature and some what logical. Those interested in relationship building may find this theory a useful guide. The  research done through surveys and experiments shows that the theory is grounded in quantitative research.