Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Cognitive Valence Theory

No description

Amanda Wood

on 3 December 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Cognitive Valence Theory

Cognitive Valence Theory by Amanda Wood A Story About... Starring
Nathan and
Lauren Definition of Key Terms





Relational Outcome Behavior Nathan increases immediacy or intimacy behavior. Perception Behavior change not perceived by Lauren Perception Intimacy behavior increase perceived by Lauren Arousal Low Arousal Moderate
Arousal High Arousal positive valence for ALL 6 schemata Cognition 1. Cultural appropriateness 2. Personal predispositions 3. Interpersonal valence 4. Relational appropriateness 5. Situational appropriateness 6. Psychological or physical state (Andersen 1989) negative valence for ANY of the 6 Relational Outcome No reciprocity or compensation Relational Outcome 1. Positive cognitive and affective appraisals 2. Reciprocity or increase in intimacy behaviors 3. Increase in relational growth and closeness Relational Outcomes 1. Negative cognitive and affective appraisals 2. Compensation or reduction in intimacy behaviors 3. Reductions in relational closeness or disengagement What questions do you have for me? References Cognitive Valence Theory is an explanation for responses to changes in nonverbal involvement and immediacy.
(Trenholm and Jensen 2004) Involvement means signaling interest in a particular interaction; immediacy refers to psychological closeness.
(Canary and Cody 1994) This theory begins when the behavioral intimacy
of a relationship partner increases above the typical
level that has been manifested previously in the relationship.
Andersen 1989 Immediacy
Cues: -increased use of touch
-close proximity
-gestural activity
-open body positions
-direct body orientation
-forward lean
-direct gaze or eye
-variation in vocal pitch,
volume or rate Canary and Cody 1994 Burgoon, Guererro, Floyd 2010 Valence refers to whether a behavior is perceived to be positive or negative compared to what was expected.
(Burgoon, Guerrero and Floyd 2010) The expression of intimacy by one person has no communicative significance if it is not perceived by one's relational partner. (Andersen 1994) Perceived increases in intimacy behavior activate a receiver physiologically and cognitively and increase their arousal.
1994) When one partner perceives increased intimacy from another, physiological arousal increases. Very high arousal increases are stressful, aversive and lead to compensation. While low arousal increases produce little or no effect. Moderate increases in arousal stimulate cognitive schemata and may lead to a desired reaction or relational change.
(Palmer and Barnett 1998) Fear
Fight or flight responses
Increased heart rate Interest
Evaluation Burgoon, Judee K., Laura K. Guerrero, and Kory Floyd.
Nonverbal Communication. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2010. Print.
Canary, Daniel J., and Michael J. Cody. Interpersonal
Communication: A Goals-based Approach. New York: St. Martin's, 1994. Print.
Fincham, Frank D., Leyan O. L. Fernandes, and Keith
Humphreys. Communicating in Relationships: A Guide for Couples and Professionals. Champaign, IL: Research, 1993. Print.
Lauren and Nathan Parts 1-5. Dir. Amanda Wood. Perf.
Nathan Wood and Lauren Garrity. 2012. Web.
Palmer, Mark T., and George A. Barnett. "The Cognitive
Valence Theory of Intimate Communication." Progress in Communication Sciences. Vol. 14. N.p.:, 1998. 39-49. Print.
Trenholm, Sarah, and Arthur Jensen. "Chapter 3." Interpersonal
Communication. New York: Oxford UP, 2004. Print. in regards to opposite gender relationships
Full transcript