Review of Management, Vol. 9, No.

3-4, December 2019

Review of Management,
Vol. 9, No. 3-4, December 2019, Pp 5-8
ISSN: 2231-0487

Interpersonal Communication in the Age of Social Media

Anju Gulla* & Srirang K Jha**

ABSTRACT
Social media has emerged as one of the most potent communication tools in recent times. It has
empowered the people to express themselves in an effective manner to reach the fellow human
beings with common interests. Social media has also helped significantly in connecting people of
extended communities across the globe. However, social media, with all its features, is extremely
addictive. Social media creates a unique virtual world where people have hardly any inhibitions in
interacting with anyone who are on the same platform like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc. Thus,
the people spend more time in the virtual world at the cost of their traditional social interactions in
the real world. Such a scenario has remarkably limited their abilities to connect with others in real
situations –posing a serious civilizational challenge by undermining interpersonal communication.
This article looks at the value of interpersonal communication in contemporary world and examines
how we can deal with diminishing social interactions in the wake of phenomenal rise of the social
media.

Keywords: Virtual World, Social Media, Interpersonal Communication

INTRODUCTION
Berger (2008) has defined interpersonal communication as an interchange of information between
two or more people that reflects how humans use verbal and non-verbal cues to realize a number of
personal and social goals. However, there are other scholars who believe that interpersonal
communication is more than transmission of information entailing how people negotiate meanings,
identity and relationships (Braithwaite and Baxter, 2008). Basic components of interpersonal
communication include how humans adjust and adapt their verbal communication and non-verbal
communication during face to face interaction, how messages are produced, how uncertainty
influences behaviour and information-management strategies, deception in interpersonal exchange,
social contentions and social interactions mediated by technology (Berger, 2005).

Knowledge about ‘the other’ in the interaction is the foundation of interpersonal communication.
There is general tendency among people know how ‘the other’ will act, interact and react in the
context of interpersonal communication as they are averse to uncertainty. Predictability of
behaviour of ‘the other’ creates a comfort zone for the people in the context of interpersonal
communication. Thus, the people are enthused seek information about ‘the others’ so that they can
predict their behaviour (Berger and Calabrese, 1975). However, people seeking information have to

*
CEO, Digigyan, New Delhi E-mail: [email protected]
**
Associate Professor & Head, General Management and International Business, Apeejay
School of Management, New Delhi E-mail: [email protected]
5
 Review of Management, Vol. 9, No. 3-4, December 2019

open up first before ‘the others’ reveal themselves. In any interpersonal communication, one of the
two or more persons involved in interpersonal communication have to open up so as to create an
environment of trust. When someone opens up before ‘the other’, it is generally without any
preconditions which also motivate the latter to reveal personal information without any hesitation.

Further, ‘relationships grow, develop, deteriorate, and dissolve as a consequence of an unfolding

social-exchange process, which may be conceived as a bartering of rewards and costs both between
the partners and between members of the partnership and others’ (Burgess, 2013). Hence, people
start revealing about self in the interpersonal communication if they feel such exchange is going to
be rewarding or there would be no adverse cost involved and stop the moment ‘the other’ does not
reciprocate. Reciprocity is the hallmark of interpersonal communication (Altman and Taylor, 1973).
Sustenance of interpersonal communication depends on satisfaction of ‘the self’ and ‘the other’ vis-
à-vis their respective self-interest (Homans, 1958).

Competencies required for effective interpersonal communication include active listening, body
language, openness, negotiation skills, decision making and problem solving skills, conflict
resolution, assertiveness, positive attitude, team work, and empathy (Beqiri, 2018). Also, the major
interpersonal communication skills include giving and receiving feedback, mastering non-verbal
communication, employing emotional intelligence, choosing the right type of listening for the
situation, using relevant questions, understanding conflict and using different strategies to resolve
them, using mentoring, coaching and counselling, building trust, creating teams and conducting
meetings and interviews (Roebuck, 2012).

There are five stages in which the interpersonal communication generally unfolds (Mongeau and
Henningsen, 2008):
1. Orientation stage: strangers share only measured information and are very thoughtful in their
interactions.
2. Exploratory affective stage: communication styles become somewhat more open and cool.
3. Affective exchange: there is a high amount of open communication between individuals. These
relationships typically consist of close friends or even romantic or platonic partners.
4. Stable exchange: continued open and personal types of interaction.
5. De-penetration: when the relationship's costs exceed its benefits, there may be a withdrawal of
information, ultimately leading to the end of the relationship.

Unfortunately, rise of social media has changed the rules of the game significantly. Interpersonal
communication pattern has undergone sea change during the last twenty years thanks to the
growing dominance of social media platforms which have empowered the people to connect with
the world in real time without stepping out of their comfort zones.

SOCIAL MEDIA AND INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

Traditional rules of interpersonal communication do not really apply in social media space. In the
social media, there is no compulsion of self-disclosure in order to attain the trust of ‘the other’ and
the person has autonomy regarding information he/she wants to share online on various platforms
such as Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn etc. However, people’s online sharing patters are influenced
by how their extended friend circles (exemplified by colleagues, alumni, friends’ friends, friends of
family members, casual acquaintances made during events, trips, even bystanders having common
interests, etc.) actual behave. Besides, all controls regarding sharing or self-disclosure remains with
them, hence there is hardly any risk of intrusion to privacy or intimacy.

Also, in the social media interactions, expectations are muted by and large. There is no compulsion
on ‘the other’ to reciprocate as communication is not intended to ‘any identifiable other’. But this

6
 Review of Management, Vol. 9, No. 3-4, December 2019

has enormous impact on the persons involved in expressing themselves through social media. It
becomes soliloquy in the long run resulting in communication fatigue, withdrawal and loss of
interpersonal competence in the real life scenarios. Social media savvy might turn into social misfits.
The problem arises primarily because committed users of social media platforms take the virtual
world a tad more seriously than the real world. As a result, they are comfortable in the social media
exchange but find thems at loss when it comes to interpersonal communication at work or
community or friend circle.

As people today spend most of their attention into the virtual life, they often tend to invest less
energy in their immediate present resulting in weakening of social ties, loss of the ability to interact
and engage oneself in face to face interaction, and social alienation which is among the most
destructive negative impacts of social media on interpersonal relations (Beniwal, 2018). Excessive
use of social media for connecting with ‘the other’ reduces empathy among the people as they
indulge in static and unidirectional conversations. For example, Misra et.al. (2014) observed that
people who had conversations in the absence of mobile devices demonstrated higher levels of
empathic concerns as compared to those who were carrying their conversation along with mobile
devices as props.

CONCLUSION
Social media and digital dialogue can have its place in our world if we take control of our usage, both
personally and professionally (Hanke, 2018). Unfortunately, social media is quite addictive. Hence, it
is imperative that we look at the social media space with a bit of caution. While social media has
opened up a new avenue for conversations amongst the people of all hues through ever-expanding
online communities, it has seriously impaired the age-old tradition of interpersonal communication
which is so crucial in family, society as well as workplaces. Detrimental effect of social media on
interpersonal communication has over-shadowed its ability to shake the world and worldviews
through presence of stronger and unorthodox online communities. Need of the hour is to channelize
the power of social media towards logical, humanistic and forward looking outlook while fostering
interpersonal communication by way of augmenting opportunities of social interactions across
families, communities, and workplaces.

REFERENCES
Altman, I. and Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal
relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Beniwal, M. (2018). Social media and its impact on interpersonal relationships.
https://jarvee.com/social-media-impact-interpersonal-relationships/
Berger, C. R. (2008). Interpersonal communication. In Wolfgang Donsbach (ed.). The International
Encyclopedia of Communication. New York, New York: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 3671–3682.
Berger, C. R. (2005). Interpersonal communication: Theoretical perspective, future prospects.
Journal of Communication. 55 (3): 415–447.
Berger, C. R. and Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some exploration in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a
developmental theory of communication. Human Communication Research. 1 (2): 99–112.
Beqiri, G. (2018). Key interpersonal skills you need to improve.
https://virtualspeech.com/blog/interpersonal-communication-skills
Braithwaite, D. O. and Baxter, L. A. (2008). Introduction: Meta-theory and theory in interpersonal
communication research. In Baxter, L. A. and Braithwaite, D. O. (ed). Engaging theories in
interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives. Los Angeles: Sage.
Burgess, R. L. (2013). Social exchange in developing relationships. Huston, Ted L. Burlington: Elsevier
Science. p. 4.

7
 Review of Management, Vol. 9, No. 3-4, December 2019

Hanke, S. (2018). How social media affects our ability to communicate: Five steps to gaining control.
https://thriveglobal.com/stories/how-social-media-affects-our-ability-to-communicate/
Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behaviour as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63 (6), 597-606.
Misra, S., Cheng, L., Genevie, J and Yuan, M. (2014). The iPhone effect: The quality of in-person social
interactions in the presence of mobile devices. Environment and Behaviour, 48 (2), 275-298.
Mongeau, P. A., and Henningsen, M. L. M. (2008). Stage theories of relationship development:
Charting the course of interpersonal communication. In Baxter, L. A. and Braithwaite, D. O. (ed).
Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives. Los Angeles: Sage.
363-375.
Roebuck, D. B. (2012). Communication strategies for today's managerial leader. Business Expert
Press.

8
Copyright of Review of Management is the property of Management Development Research
Foundation and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.