Case Integration by Ashlee Luna

Introduction

All my cases integrate relationships that are formed as a result of their communication process. There are several similar communication concepts that are integrated in the relationships throughout my five cases. I will analysis and integrate the following four concepts; 1). Presence theory,  2). Uncertainty,  3) Disclosure-boundaries, and 4). Identity,

The presence theory was experienced in all five cases. First, Lindsay and Ron in Distance “Makes Heart Grow Anxious case # 28 are trying to maintain a long distance romantic relationship (LDR) while they both attended a different college. They felt presence with each other through the use of technology devices using Skype, e-mails, texting, periodic visits, and having a real live talk on Fridays. They felt present in their cyberspace.

Second, case # 19, “We’ll Never Be That Kind of Couple” Emma and Jason discussed how they could increase their presence with each other because they thought that they were turning into the couple next door. They wanted to restore their impression of their integrity and regain what they lost.  They used the presence theory to become more attuned to one another, so their face work will be easier to renegotiate.

Third, case #12, “The Embarrassment of Disclosing Private Information in Public, Matt is not present because he continues to live in his parent’s privacy disclosure boundary management style with no regard to establishing a new culture as a couple with his wife. 

Then case # six, “I Need Some Space: Friends through Good Times and Bad Times,” Jacinta and Ashley’s presence with each other began with integration and autonomy that  occurred three week after Ashley separated from Jacinta and went to study in France. They felt presence with each other through the use of technology devices. They felt present in their cyberspace long distance relationship.

Finally, Case # two “The Whole Package: Co modifying the Self,” involves a 14-year-old girl named Ashley and her group of friend’s social presence spending their time sharing secrets, laughing together, and supporting each other while getting ready for the upcoming school dance. All five cases shared part of the presence theory in their communication process in their individual, couple, or social presence. They were all committed to integrating the three dimensional roles of presence theory, physical presence, social presence, and self presence.

All five cases felt some level of uncertainty. Lindsay’ LDR case # 28 feels threatened by ambiguous, uncertain situations and tires to avoid them by establishing more structure. She wasn’t sure how to interrupt his female’s comments on his face book and it created some anxiety. Reducing this uncertainty helped further develop and maintain their relationship. She visited his campus and met his female lesbian friend. She visited his campus and met his female lesbian friend.

Emma and Jason in case #19 are faced with uncertainty as  they move into a new place and their neighbors were unpredictable, abusive, and violent behaviors violate their relational expectations.  They had to relate to a negative, destructive relationship that cause them to engage in a relational violence pattern of responses that expressed their hard emotions of anger, jealously, hurt, and guilt publicly.

Jennifer and Matt in case # 12 as newlywed couple are facing uncertainty by having a hard time adjusting to each other’s families as individuals and having conflict on the way they each disclose privacy with his family. 

Ashley’s and Jacinta’s case # 6 faces uncertainty when their relationships formed and changed as a result of their communication process.  Ashley reacted with unpredictable hard emotions and stomped her foot in disapproval when she felt uncertainty when she gets mixed reviews. Reducing uncertainty helped develop and maintain their relationship in all five cases.

Each case had a varying degree of disclosure and boundaries.  Ron’s disclosure case # 28 was hard for Lindsay to discuss and communicate online whether something else was happening without her presence. Both Lindsay and Ron explored and found what was needed to maintain a long-distance relationship by making their communication process boundaries to develop a  feelings of love and having an enjoyable interaction as the foundation of their close relationships.                                                                                 Emma and Jason case # 19 chose to be non-confrontational by avoiding to setting boundaries with their abusive neighbors and within their own relationships.  They continued to violate relational expectations and their argument escalated with Jason and Emma verbally attacking each other because of their inability to stop and re-interpret to understand what is really going on and to set their couple boundaries. 

 Matt and Jennifer case # 12 deals with terms of privacy, disclosure, and boundary management. Their culture, values, beliefs, and traditions exist in different two co-cultures that vary in their privacy boundaries as individuals. Matt’s privacy disclosure was damaging to his wife because they had not established boundaries nor talked about their boundary management as a couple.

Ashley in case # 6 needed to set new boundaries because she needed separation and autonomy After  the fifth month of living with her best friend. She disclosed that she needed space because she was suffocating with her built in friend and roommate.

Ashley and her friends case #2 boundaries were unlimited and they showed self-disclosure by telling each other their deepest secrets. They supported one another when times were rough through nonverbal displays of affection.  They were task orientated when Brittany exclaims, “Stay focused here, girls. We’ve got a mission Ashley Jake-presentable.”  All the relationships in the five cases established their boundaries and disclosures to varying degrees. In the end they increased their presences by appraising their relationships and increased their presence with each other.

All the cases explored either individual, couple, or social identity. Lindsay and Ron case # 28 used cyberspace technology to feel immediacy identity within their behavior.

Emma and Jason’s case # 19 conflict management was renegotiated and helped to establish their couple identity away from their neighbors’ hard emotion communication.

Matt’s case 12 self identity is centered on his family tradition and he discloses to his mother, Kelly that his wife, Jennifer doesn’t feel comfortable calling her mother. Jennifer can’t protect her identity management because her husband doesn’t honor their couple identity. 

Jacinta and Ashley case # 2 identity is integrated by being together. They were inseparable for four months.  Their identities were developed through their associated group of friends and their self-view as “best friends” since the 4^th grade. Media tone, communication, or setting boundaries helped define their identities in these cases. Their relationships identity survives because they all developed coping strategies that helped them maintain their individual, couple and social identity by  just enjoying the time together.  

I will use what I learned in this course to improve my communication process with my best friends.  Our relationship was built because of the presence theory throughout high school we were inseparable. We were committed to integrating the three dimensional roles of media into our relationships by using gaming (physical presence), texting (social presence), and face book (self presence). We acted and reacted in a positive communication process as a couple with a common cause of love and friendship. Our friendship was our social identity, because we shared a co-orientation of dance. We danced together since 4^th grade, throughout high school, and with the semi-professional dance teams. Then, uncertainty of jealousy and loss of support clouded our relationship for a year.  We didn’t communicate for a whole year and those hard emotions were hard to experience because it violated my relational expectations.  Our relationship was unpredictable and we acted negatively and destructively in our relationship.  We were engaged in a relational violence pattern of responses that expressed anger, jealously, hurt, and guilt publicly.

My family and another group of male friends help me with expressing my disclosure and setting boundaries because I needed my space from this rejection.

I re-build another relationships with my snowboarding male buddies who were committed to integrating the three dimensional roles of media into their relationships by using physical presence, social presence, and self presence with predictability and unconditional love. My dance friends and I moved forward with our dance careers. After a year of separation we re-kindled our old friendships by using the combination of face to face and cyberspace communication to repair and restore our long distance friendship relationship. Dance is no longer our co-orientation; instead our friendship has become our common cause. We restored our integrity and regained what we lost our friendship and dancing together. Our identities had been developed through our associated group of friends and the central of this group was me. We have been “best friends” since the 4^th grade. My social identity was impacted by my group of friends. The mini-lectures, study guides, readings, video, and case study analysis awakened all my multiple intelligence to understand my own communication process in various relationships. Effective communication is essential for me to succeed in pursuit of my personal, social, and career goals.

“Distance Makes Heart Grow Anxious” case # 28

Lindsay and Ron in “Distance Makes Heart Grow Anxious” case # 28 are trying to maintain a long distance romantic relationship (LDR) while they both attend a different college. They used several forms of media to communicate with each other.  They felt presence with each other through the use of technology devices. They also developed a plan to communicate with each other by calling, using Skype, e-mailing, texting, periodic visits, and having a real live talk on Fridays. They felt present in their cyberspace with each other. They integrated the three dimensional roles of media into their relationships by using gaming (physical presence), texting (social presence), and face book (self presence). 

Lindsay felt uncertainty when Ron developed a friendship with women at his school and she wasn’t sure of the nature of their relationships. In order for Lindsay to reduce anxiety she had to start to reduce the uncertainty. Hofstede "refers to these variations as the uncertainty avoidance dimension, the extent to which the culture( Lindsay’ LDR) feels threatened by ambiguous, uncertain situations and tires to avoid them by establishing more structure" (pp.115, para.1). Reducing uncertainty also reduces unpredictability and anxiety. Ron’s disclosure was hard for Lindsay to discuss and communicate to him online whether something else was happening without her presence. She wasn’t sure how to interrupt his female’s comments on his face book and it created some anxiety. Then she visited Ron at his campus. Upon her return from her weekend visit she felt more secure because she reduced her uncertainty by getting a visual of Ron’s setting. Reducing this uncertainty helped further develop and maintain their relationship. She visited his campus and met his female lesbian friend. 

They increased their presences by appraising their LDR life and figured that they wanted to increase their presence with each other. Their communication helped them cope with their re-appraisal.  As a result, they decided to play a new call of duty game online on Wednesday. They will watch a crime drama and text each other about it.  These social factors lead to their presence of feeling that their body was in another place and their heart is united. They felt that their interactions, relationship, society, and their personal identity were out in their shared cyberspace.

Using cyberspace technology allowed them to feel immediacy within their behavior toward each other. The indirect and nonverbal affectionate communication helped establish their emotional closeness with each other. They set the tone in their environmental presence as a special date of togetherness. Their used immediacy behaviors as verbal or non verbal communication to help develop closeness in their relationship. Lots of verbal behaviors and personal forms of expression in relational closeness existed between Lindsay and Ron. Their nonverbal communication played a big role in promoting a relational closeness. Lindsay was always smiling, very confident, keeping an open mind, outgoing, and trusting her LDR. Her immediacy behaviors conveyed warmth, communicated positive relational affect, signaled approach and availability for communication, and created an increased of physiological arousal in Ron.  Their  media tone and the communication and time boundaries they set for their relationship to thrive. Each form of media communication probably followed with a time of an emotional reflection. Re-reading their text or Skype messages throughout the week helped them relive their presences, closeness, and immediacy with each other making the heart grow closer with each reflection.

Their plan followed the communication and researches of LDRS relationships strategies found in our text.  “Psychology and communication researchers who study LDR’s support group of lonely lovers list several coping strategies; 1). Send a video to each other, 2). Text about little things, and  3). Don’t talk about the relationships too much when they see each other, and just enjoy the time together.” (pp.224).  Lindsay stood up for what she valued and told her brother,  All relationships take hard work, use the relational score card and try to make one relationships last longer than one month by applying what I do with my long distance relationship. This is the same scenario that my brother and sister share about her LDR.

Both Lindsay and Ron explored and found what was needed to maintain their long-distance relationship.  Feelings of love and liking are the foundation of close relationships (pp.116, para.1). Love develops when it is shared and returned. Lindsay and Ron affection is based on having an enjoyable interaction with each other and that is why their long distance relationship (LDR) is working. Technology has changed the way we communicate in LDR. There are several things that are needed to maintain a LDR. First, Lindsay has two forms of social support to help her cope with LDR. Several kinds of self disclosures occurred between Ron and Lindsay. They resolved this by meeting each others friends, getting a visual on Ron’s setting in, and increase their time interacting with other media strategies.  It helped them develop their trust further for each other. In LDR relationships, couples are likely to idealize their partners and relationships than couples that are physically together because they spend quality time together and accentuate the positive elements of their relationship. 

Then, Lindsay became friends with other ‘lonely lovers’ who were also in a LDR.  They discussed and shared their plans to maintain their LDR. It followed the communication and researches of LDRS relationships strategies found in our text.  “Psychology and communication researchers who study LDR’s support group of lonely lovers list several coping strategies; 1). Send a video to each other, 2). Text about little things, 3). Don’t talk about the relationships too much when they see each other, and just enjoy the time together.” (pp.224).  

I think that combining media and face to face communication will help Lindsay and Ron’s long distance relationships thrive. Being apart will help them appreciate and value each other. Both of them are committed to integrating the three dimensional roles of media into their relationships by using gaming (physical presence), texting (social presence), and face book (self presence). 

“We’ll Never Be That Kind of Couple”

In the case # 19 “We’ll Never Be That Kind of Couple” Emma and Jason had just moved into a new apartment and both started new jobs. They were excited about living together and living in a new place. However their neighbors were unpredictable, abusive, and violent.  This created lots of uncertainty and it their violated relational expectations.  These neighbors could not manage their high disclosure boundaries of privacy within their own relationships and acted unpredictable in a negative and destructive relationship.  They were engaged in a relational violence pattern of responses that expressed their hard emotions of anger, jealously, hurt, and guilt publicly. Their lives were full of chaos and no calmness.

Emma and Jason would hear their neighbors arguing through the dark side of the night displaying their dominance over each other, and let their hard emotions play into a relational violation.   They discussed how they would never be that kind of couple because they had a co-orientation of being happy together. However, they chose to be non-confrontational by avoiding to setting boundaries with their abusive neighbors and within their own relationships.  They dealt with their neighbors passively by avoiding their neighbors.

I picked this case to do my analysis on because I think that Emma and Jason display all the hard emotions throughout the story. They are governed by their serpentine model of , interaction, act  control patterns,. It's strange how neighbor’s invisible verbal power and dominance behaviors would affect Emma and Jason behavior toward each other with similar hard emotions that also played into their own relational violation expectation. 

Although Emma and Jason agreed to never argue,  like their neighbors they started to have violations of their own relational expectations. They experienced the four hard emotions anger, jealousy, hurt, and guilt at various stages in their relationship. One night when Emma came home from work she saw that Jason was making pizza for dinner. Emma felt that Jason violated her expectations that he would take the time to cook something special for his special lady. He acted, she re-acted, and interpreted that his relational characteristics and actions were a symbol that she wasn’t valued. Then, Emma’s defensive control strategy was to get angry because when it’s Jason’s turn to cook he would always make pizza. She felt a stoic type of bold hurt because she couldn’t understand why Jason never put a little more effort into making dinner and cooking something special for her. 

At the dinner table jealous Jason confronted Emma about her befriending her ex boyfriend on face book.  Since Emma was already irritated with Jason she interpreted this as him being jealous and reacted aggressively and angrily snapping back at him with lack of empathy as a defense strategy.

They continued to violate relational expectations and their argument escalated with Jason and Emma verbally attacking each other because of their inability to stop and re-interpert to understand what is really going on.  As a result of Emma pouring all of her food on Jason’s lap, he leaves and doesn’t come back till the morning.  The violation of relational expectation patterns continue when Emma feels guilty and is worried for what she had done and apologizes to Jason when he came home in the morning. 

This display of their hard emotions changes from the  co-orientation common interest of  being a happy couple to, spending more times apart with their friends.  Then Jason violated another relational expectation and wanted to reschedule their date night and go to a football game with a friend.  Emma reacted and got mad and Jason realized it was wrong of him to want to reschedule their date night.

Jason felt guilty and tried to justify his betrayal and rejection and bought flowers for Emma on their date night in attempt to make amends.  Emma reacted and retaliated with a one up control pattern and explained that since he thought going to a football game was more important than their relationship then she is going out with her friends. 

Even though Jason had already decided to not go to the game and that spending time with Emma was more important she still decided to go out with her friends to extort her power.  Jason asked her to stay because he wanted to repair their relationship by saying he was sorry and had gotten her flowers.  But at this point power and dominance of hard emotions  played  into relational violence pattern of control because she was still angry,  hurt, and jealous that he had thought about going to the game with his friend instead of being with her and she reacted angrily and took the vase and flowers and threw them on the floor. When Emma came home later that night, Jason was waiting on the couch for her. She rejected him, gave him the sulking silent treatment, and went upstairs to bed.     

                                     

Good thing that Emma and Jason’s conflict management between each other was renegotiated. In the morning both of them felt guilty and regretful.  They apologized to each other and discussed how they thought they were turning into the couple next door and how they will never be that kind of couple. They wanted to restore their impression of their integrity and regain what they lost so they apologized.  They began to repair their self-esteem and relationship as a couple. Emma and Jason’s apology let them  repair their transgressions by renegotiating their rules and boundaries of their relationships with their apology to each other. They found an explanation for their actions that was influenced by their abusive neighbors, or was it? Is it possible that Jason and Emma’s hard emotions’ were a result of their own power perceptions that they granted to each other as they established their own boundaries within their own relationships.  Both Emma and Jason were willing to work together toward a common interest to breaking the abuse behavior patterns within their couple relationship. They are attuned to one another, so their facework will be easier to renegotiate. They will manage conflict.