Imagined interaction and interpersonal communication

Imagined interactions, family money management patterns and coalitions, and attitudes toward money and credit

“…Seven items from the imagined interaction scale (Honeycutt et al, 1990) were used to measure the activity (frequency) of experiencing imagined interactions and the pleasantness of the imagined interactions. Rather than asking about imagined interactions in general, the items were rewritten to reflect imagined interactions about credit card use (for participants with credit cards) or about spending behaviors (for participants without credit cards).…”

“…Imagined interactions serve a variety of functions (Honeycutt, Zagacki, & Edwards, 1990). Two of the most important are rehearsal (Edwards et al, 1988), in that they are used to prepare for future interaction, and thinking about or resolving conflict (Honeycutt, 2003).…”

Planning sources, planning difficulty and verbal fluency

“…In Waldron's (1990) study of 2,273 thoughts generated by subjects during reviews of videotapes of their interactions, 27% of the thoughts had to do with planned actions for reaching interaction goals, while an additional 17% were concerned with the goals themselves. Other researchers have shown that people frequently imagine interactions between themselves and others (Edwards, Honeycutt, & Zagacki, 1988;Honeycutt, Zagacki, & Edwards, 1990). These imagined interactions may serve as plans for future encounters.…”

Students' Imagined Interactions as Intrapersonal Explanations for Instructional Dissent

“…The functions and uses of IIs are predicted by individual differences such as the five factor model of personality (Honeycutt, Pence, & Gearhart, 2012, covert narcissism (Honeycutt, Pence, & Gearhart, 2013), attachment (Honeycutt, 1998(Honeycutt, -1999, argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2011), Machiavellianism (Allen, 1990), locus of control (Honeycutt, Edwards, & Zagacki, 1989-1990, communication apprehension (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2011;Honeycutt, Choi, & DeBerry, 2009), taking conflict personally (Wallenfelsz & Hample, 2010), and Myers-Briggs personality preferences (Honeycutt & Keaton, 2012. In addition, the use of IIs are associated with relational features such as uncertainty (Van Kelegom & Wright, 2013), anxiety (Allen & Honeycutt, 1997), emotional responses (Honeycutt et al, 1989(Honeycutt et al, -1990Honeycutt, Nasser, Banner, Mapp, & DuPont, 2008), loneliness (Honeycutt et al, 1990), marital ideology (Honeycutt, 1998(Honeycutt, -1999, relational quality (Honeycutt, -2009, talk in marriage (Honeycutt & Wiemann, 1999), and intrapersonal communication satisfaction (Honeycutt & McCann, 2008).…”

“…As Rosenblatt and Meyer (1986) explained, ''These interactions may be fragmentary or extended, may ramble, stay on track, or recurrently go over the same matter'' (p. 319). Imagined interactions tend to involve more self-talk versus other-talk, occur more frequently before actual interactions than after conversations, tend to be about more personal than impersonal topics (Honeycutt, Zagacki, & Edwards, 1990), and are equally pleasant and unpleasant (Edwards, Honeycutt, & Zagacki, 1988).…”