Imagined interactions (IIs), a cognitive process generating mental imagery of conversations, play an important role in interpersonal relationships. This study investigates the frequency of everyday topics of talk represented in imagined talk and the bivariate and multivariate associations with the features of II functions and II attributes. Participants (N = 264) reported their general tendencies using II features and general frequency of topics of everyday talk in IIs in a cross-sectional survey. Bivariate and multivariate correlations were estimated to investigate four exploratory research questions. The results identify consistent patterns of association between II features and everyday topics of imagined talk at two levels of abstraction of everyday talk; relationally centered topics emerge as thematic for understanding II usage and functions. Contributions to the theoretical and methodological framework of IIs are discussed.
BaldwinM. W. (1992).
Relational schemas and the processing of social information. Psychological Bulletin,
112, 461–484. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.461
2.
BodieG. D.HoneycuttJ. M.VickeryA. J. (2013).
An analysis of the correspondence between the functions and attributes of imagined interactions. Human Communication Research,
39, 157–183. doi:10.1111/hcre.12003
3.
CarpenterG. W. (2016). Imagine me and you: A mixed methods investigation of imagined interactions in online dating (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 10162710)
4.
DillardJ. P.KnoblochL. K. (2011). Interpersonal influence. In KnappM. L.DalyJ. A. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of interpersonal communication (4th ed., pp. 389–422).
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
5.
DuckS.RuttD. J.HoyM.StrejcH. H. (1991).
Some evident truths about conversations in everyday relationships: All communications are not created equal. Human Communication Research,
18, 288–267. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1991.tb00545.x
6.
EldredgeJ. H.HoneycuttJ. M.WhiteR. C.StandigeM. (2015).
On the functions of imagined interactions in night dreams. Imagination, Cognition and Personality,
35, 244–257. doi:10.1177/0276236615595231
7.
FrisbyB. N.ByrnesK.ManssonD. H.Booth-ButterfieldM.BirminghamM. K. (2011).
Topic avoidance, everyday talk, and stress in romantic military and non-military couples. Communication Studies,
62, 241–257. doi:10.1080/10510974.2011.553982
8.
GoldsmithD. J.BaxterL. A. (1996).
Constituting relationships in talk: A taxonomy of speech events in social and personal relationships. Human Communication Research,
23, 87–114. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00388.x
9.
HechtM. (1978).
The conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal communication satisfaction. Human Communication Research,
4, 254–264. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1978.tb00614.x
10.
HoneycuttJ. M. (2003). Imagined Interactions: Daydreaming about communication.
Cresskill, NJ:
Hampton.
11.
HoneycuttJ. M. (2008). Imagined interaction theory: Mental representations of interpersonal communication. In BaxterL. A.BraithwaiteD. O. (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 77–87).
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
12.
HoneycuttJ. M. (2010). Forgive but don’t forget: Correlates of rumination about conflict. In HoneycuttJ. M. (Ed.), Imagine that: Studies in imagined interactions (pp. 17–30).
Cresskill, NJ:
Hampton.
13.
HoneycuttJ. M.BryanS. P. (2011). Scripts and communication for relationships.
New York, NY:
Peter Lang.
14.
HoneycuttJ. M.ChoiC. W.DeBerryJ. R. (2009).
Communication apprehension and imagined interactions. Communication Research Reports,
26, 228–236. doi:10.1080/08824090903074423
15.
HoneycuttJ. M.PenceM. E.GearhartC. C. (2012).
Associations between imagined interactions and the “big five” personality traits. Imagination, Cognition and Personality,
32, 273–289. doi:10.2190/IC.32.3.d
16.
HoneycuttJ. M.VickeryA. J.HatcherL. C. (2015).
The daily use of imagined interaction features. Communication Monographs,
82, 201–223. doi:10.1080/03637751.2014.953965
17.
HoneycuttJ. M.ZagackiK. S.EdwardsR. (1990).
Imagined interaction and interpersonal communication. Communication Reports,
3, 1–9. doi:10.1080/08934219009367494
18.
HoneycuttJ. M.ZagackiK. S.EdwardsR. (1992).
Imagined interaction, conversational sensitivity, and communication competence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality,
12, 139–157. doi:10.2190/B9PC-51RJ-1D7N-4M94
19.
JeffersonG. (1988).
On the sequential organization of troubles-talk in ordinary conversation. Social Problems,
35, 418–441. doi:10.2307/800595
20.
LedbetterA. M.Broeckelman-PostM. A.KrawsczynA. M. (2011).
Modeling everyday talk: Differences across communication media and sex composition of friendship dyads. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,
28, 223–241. doi:10.1177/0265407510377904
21.
LedbetterA. M.KeatingA. T. (2015).
Maintaining Facebook friendships: Everyday talk as a mediator of threats to closeness. Western Journal of Communication,
79, 197–217. doi:10.1080/10570314.2014.943426
22.
MadisonT. P.HoneycuttJ. M.CovingtonE. N.AuterP. J. (in press). Winners and losers: Depression, learned helplessness and the trauma of losing political elections. In HoneycuttJ. M. (Ed.), Coping with trauma: Promoting mental health through imagery and imagined interactions (Chapter 10, pp. TBD).
New York, NY:
Peter Lang.
23.
MadisonT. P.PorterL. V.GreuleA. (2016).
Parasocial compensation hypothesis: Predictors of using parasocial relationships to compensate for real-life interaction. Imagination, Cognition and Personality,
35, 258–279. doi:10.1177/0276236615595232
24.
MadisonT. P.RoldM.HoneycuttJ. M. (2014).
How partisans differ from independents: The imaginative functions of self-understanding, rehearsal, and relationship maintenance. Imagination, Cognition and Personality,
34, 105–116. doi:10.2190/IC.34.2.b
25.
PalomaresN. A. (2014). The goal construct in interpersonal communication. In BergerC. R. (Ed.), Interpersonal communication (pp. 77–99).
Boston, MA:
Walter de Gruyter.
26.
SchrodtP.BraithwaiteD. O.SolizJ.Tye-WilliamsS.MillerA.NormandE. L.HarriganM. M. (2007).
An examination of everyday talk in stepfamily systems. Western Journal of Communication,
71, 216–234. doi:10.1080/10570310701510077
27.
SchrodtP.SolizJ.BraithwaiteD. O. (2008).
A social relations model of everyday talk and relational satisfaction in stepfamilies. Communication Monographs,
75, 190–217. doi:10.1080/03637750802023163
28.
Van KelegomM. J.WrightC. N. (2013).
An investigation of episodic and partner-specific imagined interaction use. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality,
32, 319–338. doi:10.2190/IC.32.4.b
29.
VickeryA. J.KeatonS. A.BodieG. D. (2015).
Intrapersonal communication and listening goals: An examination of attributes and functions of imagined interactions and active-empathic listening behaviors. Southern Communication Journal,
80, 20–38. doi:10.1080/1041794X.2014.939295
