The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Perceptions of communication behavior associated with relationship terms
Abstract
Individuals use a variety of terms to designate the nature of their relationships with others, e.g., friend, lover, pal, etc. Although expectations for certain types of communicative behavior surely accompany the use of these terms, it was not clear what their communicative referents were. The first phase of this study obtained intimacy‐scaled ratings from 100 subjects to 62 relationship terms. Then more than 1,000 subjects ranging in age from 12 to 90 from eight locations across the United States responded to the six relationship words selected (lover, best friend, friend, pal, colleague, acquaintance) in terms of associated communicative behavior. The three factors central to these responses (personalness, synchrony, difficulty) were then used to analyze the relationship terms varied according to the gender, age, and marital status of the subject and the composition of a relationship to a specific other by gender. Among other findings: All age groups perceived increases in both personalized and synchronized communication as the terms rated became more intimate. Difficult communication was perceived as a part of both intimate and nonintimate relationships. Personalized communication was associated more with female and male‐female relationships than with male relationships. Younger respondents (below age 22) perceived more personalized and synchronized communication in all relationships than did those over age 41.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Facebook self-disclosure: Examining the role of traits, social cohesion, and motives
Hollenbaugh, E. E., & Ferris, A. L. (2014) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.055 · Cited by 398
DUCK, S., RUTT, D. J., HOY, M., & STREJC, H. H. (1991) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1991.tb00545.x · Cited by 252
Age and gender differences in photo tagging gratifications.
Dhir, A., & Torsheim, T. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.044 · Cited by 63
Hecht, M. L. (1984) · Western Journal of Speech Communication · doi:10.1080/10570318409374157 · Cited by 56
Metadata
- Authors
- Knapp, M. L., Ellis, D. G., & Williams, B. A.
- Venue
- Communication Monographs
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1980-11
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 262-278
- ISSN
- 0363-7751 (ISSN-L)
- 1479-5787
- OpenAlex
- W2076507781
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Perceptions of communication behavior associated with relationship terms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/03637758009376036
- The paper
- Knapp, M. L., Ellis, D. G., & Williams, B. A. (1980). Perceptions of communication behavior associated with relationship terms. Communication Monographs. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758009376036
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.