Cited by 252Attachment and Relationship DynamicsCommunication Studies and MediaLanguage, Discourse, Communication Strategies

Some Evident Truths About Conversations in Everyday Relationships All Communications Are Not Created Equal

DUCK, STEVE, RUTT, DEBORAH J., HOY, MARGARET, STREJC, HURST HEATHER·1991·Human Communication Research

Abstract

This article presents a program of studies that map out daily conversations and so establish a geography of everyday communication. A new method (the Iowa Communication Record) is offered to extend research using diary methods and focus the researcher on communication in daily life. Three studies collectively show (a) consistent sex differences in the quality and nature of conversations across different types of relationships, (b) a consistent rank ordering of relationship types that differs from that intuitively included in previous models of relationship formation, and (c) a consistent difference between conversations held on different days of the week, with Wednesdays associated with greater degrees of conflictive communication. Self-disclosure is much less frequent in everyday life than assumed on the basis of laboratory work, and the predominant form of communication in intimate relationships is not only nonintimate but not simply distinguishable from communication in other relationship types. Communication quality distinguishes female from male partners, suggesting that previous findings on preference for female partners are truly founded in communication variables, which have previously been underrated. The article shows that closer attention must in future be paid to communicative variations created by daily events and circumstances, and the role of routine communication in daily life must be explored in future studies of social participation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1991.tb00545.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Learning behaviour may depend not only on time of day but also on day of the week, and more specifically on type of day (weekday or weekend).

    “Since the literature supports claims that learning behaviour may depend not only on time of day but also on day of the week, and more specifically type of day (weekday or weekend), we studied the hypothesis separately for weekdays and weekends.”

    From When Do Learners Study? (2022) · cites this paper as Duck, Rutt, Hoy, & Strejc, 1991

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DUCK, S., RUTT, D. J., HOY, M., & STREJC, H. H.
Affiliations
University of Iowa (US)
Venue
Human Communication Research
Published
1991-12
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
228-267
ISSN
  • 0360-3989 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2958
OpenAlex
W2074282586
Cited by
252
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 9
FWCI
15.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Human Communication Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Communication Studies and Media
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Keywords
everyday communication, everyday conversation, diary method, relationship type, intimate relationships, self-disclosure, communication quality, mate preferences, social participation

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