Messages that demand spontaneous behavior or messages that pose subtle
inconsistencies are referred to as "paradoxical communication." Such communication can result in a dysfunctional double band characterized by withdrawal and denial of personal responsibility. This paper presents double-bind
theory as a framework for looking at organizational-change attempts. The role
of the change agent is then examined to show how double binds can be avoided.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alderfer, C.P.Effects of task factors on job attitudes and behavior: A symposium. Personnel Psychology, 1969, 22, 418-428.
2.
Argyris, C.Is capitalism the culprit? Organizational Dynamics, 1978, 6, 21-35.
3.
Bateson, G., Jackson, D.D., Haley, J., & Weakland, J.Toward a theory of schizophrenia. Behavioral Science, 1956, 1, 251-264.
4.
Beavers, W.R., Blumberg, J., Timken, K.R., & Weiner, M.P.Communication patterns of mothers of schizophrenics. Family Process, 1965, 4, 95-104.
5.
Benne, K.D., Bradford, L.P. , Gibb, J.R., & Lippitt, R.O. (Eds.). The laboratory method of changing and learning. Palo Alto, CA: Science & Behavior Books, 1975.
6.
Berger, A.A test of the double bind hypothesis of schizophrenia. Family Process, 1965, 4, 198-205.
7.
Bobbitt, H.R., & Ford, J.D.Decision-maker choice as a determinant of organizational structure. Academy of Management Review, 1980, 5, 13-23.
8.
Bugental, D.E., Kaswan, J.W., & Love, L.R.Perception of contradictory meanings conveyed by verbal and nonverbal channels . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970, 16, 647-655.
Frankl, V.Paradoxical intention. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 1960, 14, 520-535.
11.
Gabarro, J.Socialization at the top—How CEO's and subordinates evolve interpersonal contracts. Organizational Dynamics, 1979, 7, 3-23.
12.
Gibb, J.R.A research perspective of the laboratory method. In K.D. Benne, L.P. Bradford, J.R. Gibb, & R.O. Lippitt (Eds.), The laboratory method of changing and learning . Palo Alto, CA: Science & Behavior Books, 1975.
13.
Graves, J.R., & Robinson, J.D.Proxemic behavior as a function of inconsistent verbal and nonverbal messages. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 1976, 23, 336-337.
Haley, J.Strategies of psychotherapy. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1963.
16.
Johnson, D.M., McCarthy, K., & Allen, T.Congruent and contradictory verbal and nonverbal communication of cooperativeness and competitiveness in negotiations. Communication Research , 1976, 3, 288-289.
17.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R.L.The social psychology of organizations. New York: John Wiley, 1978.
18.
Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, J.Organization and environment. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, 1967.
19.
Leathers, D.G.The impact of multichannel message inconsistency on verbal and nonverbal decoding behaviors. Communication Monographs, 1979, 46, 88-100.
20.
Mehrabian, A., & Weiner, M.Decoding of inconsistent communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 6, 109-114.
21.
Mishler, E.G., & Waxler, N.E.Family processes and schizophrenia. New York: Science House, 1968.(a)
22.
Mishler, E.G., & Waxler, N.E.Interaction in families. New York: John Wiley, 1968.(b)
23.
Nida, R.A.The double bind theory of communication as it relates to communication apprehension and associated personality development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, 1976.
24.
Olson, D.H.Empirically unbinding the double bind: Review of research and conceptual reformulations . Family Process, 1972, 11, 69-94.
