The motivations for spontaneous phonetic convergence have implications for theories of memory, speech production and perception, social cognition, contact‐induced language change, and any number of other phenomena. Thus, this paper examines two distinct but related theoretical positions commonly taken on the motivations for spontaneous phonetic convergence: the Automatist stance and the Interventionist stance. Automatists argue that phonetic convergence is the automatic result of the unmediated action of a perception‐production link; of the action of general psychological processes such as priming and simulation effects on linguistic representations in the brain. Interventionists, on the other hand, argue that convergence is the product of the very mediation of the perception‐production link, be it linguistic or social mediation, typically for the purpose of managing the social distance between interlocutors. I argue that these seemingly diametrically opposed stances are in fact complementary, not contradictory—having been developed to describe data at various points along a continuum of sociality—and that it is most productive to understand one's own position on the issue from this standpoint. Topics such as exemplar theory, gestural drift, entrainment, and communication accommodation theory are discussed for their relevance to the question at hand.