Social work theory · Volume B: Relational & Systemic

Communication and interaction theories

Communication and interaction theories explain how people create, maintain and change relationships through the messages they exchange.

1. What it is

Communication and interaction theories explain how people create, maintain and change relationships through the messages they exchange. They treat communication as a relational process in which every message carries information and also defines the relationship between the people involved (Watzlawick et al., 1967). From this viewpoint, problems are understood as features of interaction patterns between people. The family includes the cybernetic and systemic work of Gregory Bateson and the Mental Research Institute (MRI) in Palo Alto, and the sociological tradition of symbolic interactionism. Both strands have shaped family therapy, social work communication skills and interactional approaches to practice (Payne, 2021).

Communication patterns. Communication patterns are the habitual, repeated ways in which people in a relationship send, receive and respond to messages. They include who speaks to whom, how disagreement is expressed and how feelings are acknowledged. Satir (1972) described common incongruent patterns under stress, such as blaming, placating, being super-reasonable and being irrelevant, and contrasted them with congruent communication in which words, tone and feelings match.

Roles. In interactional terms, roles are positions that people take up in relation to one another and confirm through repeated exchanges. Symbolic interactionists argue that roles are negotiated and enacted in interaction, and that people learn who they are by taking the role of others (Mead, 1934). Goffman (1959) described everyday life as a performance in which people manage the impressions they make on others.

Feedback. Feedback in communication theory refers to the way responses to a message shape the next message, producing self-reinforcing or self-correcting cycles (Watzlawick et al., 1967). The concept is drawn from cybernetics (see General systems theory). A worker’s nod, question or silence is feedback that influences what a client says next.

Relational processes. Watzlawick et al. (1967) proposed five axioms of communication. First, one cannot not communicate: silence and withdrawal also send messages. Second, every communication has a content aspect and a relationship aspect, and the relationship aspect qualifies the content. Third, the nature of a relationship depends on how participants punctuate the sequence of events, for example each believing they are only reacting to the other. Fourth, people communicate digitally (through words) and analogically (through tone, posture and gesture). Fifth, exchanges are either symmetrical, based on equality, or complementary, based on difference, such as leader and follower.

Gregory Bateson and the double bind. Bateson brought cybernetic ideas into the study of human communication and distinguished levels of message, including metacommunication, or communication about communication (Ruesch & Bateson, 1951; Bateson, 1972). Bateson et al. (1956) proposed the double bind, in which a person in an important relationship repeatedly receives contradictory messages at different levels, is unable to comment on the contradiction and cannot leave the situation. A parent who says “come here” while stiffening and pulling away is a common illustration. The double bind was originally offered as an explanation for schizophrenia. That explanation has not been supported, but the concept remains useful for understanding confusing and coercive communication.

The MRI interactional approach. Watzlawick et al. (1974) distinguished first-order change, which occurs within a system without changing its rules, from second-order change, which alters the rules themselves. They argued that problems are often maintained by the very solutions people attempt, and that reframing a situation can open up new responses.

Symbolic interactionism. Symbolic interactionism developed from Mead’s (1934) social psychology and was named by Blumer (1969). It holds that people act towards things on the basis of the meanings those things have for them, that meanings arise from social interaction, and that meanings are modified through interpretation. Cooley’s (1902) “looking-glass self” expresses the related idea that self-concept develops from how we imagine others see us. Labelling theory, which explains how stigmatising labels shape identity and behaviour, grew from this tradition.

2. Historical development

Communication theory in this sense emerged from the meeting of cybernetics, anthropology and psychiatry in the 1950s. Bateson’s research project in Palo Alto studied communication in families and drew on Russell and Whitehead’s theory of logical types to explain paradoxical messages (Bateson, 1972). The project produced the double bind hypothesis and, through the MRI, a distinctive approach that treated interaction as the proper focus of explanation and therapy. Pragmatics of Human Communication (Watzlawick et al., 1967) systematised these ideas and established interactional theory as a field in its own right.

Symbolic interactionism had a separate origin in the Chicago school of sociology. It became influential in social work through labelling theory, studies of stigma and institutions, and the attention it gives to how clients and workers construct the meaning of problems (Payne, 2021). Both strands reached social work in the 1960s and 1970s through family therapy and through communication skills training, which became a core part of social work education.

3. Practical guidance

Communication and interaction theories guide how workers listen, respond and intervene in relationships.

• Attend to the relationship message. Notice what a message says about the relationship as well as its content. A parent’s “fine, do what you like” may carry anger or withdrawal that matters more than the words.
• Observe non-verbal communication. Watch for mismatches between words and tone or posture, and check them tentatively with clients. Remember that your own silence and body language also communicate.
• Explore punctuation. When people blame each other, map the sequence as a cycle. Helping each person see their part in the loop can reduce blame and open space for change.
• Look at attempted solutions. Ask what people have already tried. Where a repeated solution keeps a problem going, support them to try something different (Watzlawick et al., 1974).
• Name double binds safely. Contradictory demands from services, such as being told to leave a violent partner while losing housing support, can be named and addressed through advocacy.
• Watch labels. Consider how diagnostic and risk labels shape the way others treat a person and how the person sees themselves (Blumer, 1969).

4. Critical evaluation

Strengths. These theories give precise concepts for describing interaction and have shaped core social work skills such as active listening, reflection and attention to non-verbal communication (Koprowska, 2020). The axioms of communication are practical, memorable and applicable across individual, family, group and organisational settings. Symbolic interactionism draws attention to meaning, stigma and the power of labels.

Limitations. The double bind theory of schizophrenia was not supported by research and contributed to blaming families, particularly mothers, for serious mental illness. Interactional approaches can treat communication as if it occurs between equals, neglecting gender, age, class and other power differences that shape who can speak and be heard (Payne, 2021). Strategic techniques derived from MRI work have raised ethical concerns about transparency. Communication norms are culturally specific, so concepts such as “direct” or “congruent” communication may not fit all cultures, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communication practices.

Overall importance. Communication and interaction theories underpin much of social work’s everyday practice. They explain why relationships matter in every encounter and provide tools for understanding conflict and change. Combined with attention to power and culture, they remain essential to direct practice.

5. References

• Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chandler.
• Bateson, G., Jackson, D. D., Haley, J., & Weakland, J. (1956). Toward a theory of schizophrenia. Behavioral Science, 1(4), 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830010402
• Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Prentice-Hall.
• Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. Charles Scribner’s Sons.
• Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday.
• Koprowska, J. (2020). Communication and interpersonal skills in social work (5th ed.). Learning Matters.
• Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist. University of Chicago Press.
• Payne, M. (2021). Modern social work theory (5th ed.). Red Globe Press.
• Ruesch, J., & Bateson, G. (1951). Communication: The social matrix of psychiatry. W. W. Norton.
• Satir, V. (1972). Peoplemaking. Science and Behavior Books.
• Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. H., & Jackson, D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication: A study of interactional patterns, pathologies, and paradoxes. W. W. Norton.
• Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J. H., & Fisch, R. (1974). Change: Principles of problem formation and problem resolution. W. W. Norton.