Heurism

In applying our criteria from Chapter 3 to CPM, we see that it has much to commend it. First, with reference to heurism, CPM seems to be heuristic because it has been utilized as a framework in a variety of situations, including child sexual abuse (Petronio, Reeder, Hecht, & Ros-Mendoza, 1996), disclosure of HIV or AIDS status (Cline & McKenzie, 2000), and medical mistakes (Allman, 1998).

Logical Consistency

One criticism of the theory that Petronio (2002) has discussed relates to its logical consistency. Some critics have observed that CPM uses the term dialectic inaccurately, claiming to be dialectic in nature when it’s really based on dualistic thinking. The basis for the criticism stems from Baxter and Montgomery’s (1996) distinctions among monologic, dualistic, and dialectic approaches (see Chapter 12). Using these distinctions, Baxter and Montgomery have argued that CPM takes a dualistic approach, treating privacy and disclosure as independent of one another and able to coexist in tandem rather than in the dynamic interplay characteristic of dialectics.

Petronio (2002) responds to this criticism by noting that perhaps the accusation of dualistic thinking comes from the use of the terms balance and equilibrium in the early versions of CPM Theory. Petronio argues that CPM is not focused on balance in the psychological sense. “Instead, [CPM] argues for coordination with others that does not advocate an optimum balance between disclosure and privacy. As an alternative, the theory claims there are shifting forces with a range of privacy and disclosure that people handle by making judgments about the degrees of privacy and publicness they wish to experience in any given interaction” (pp. 12-13 [emphasis in original]). Thus, Petronio argues that it is legitimate to call CPM Theory dialectical in nature.

Testability and Utility

We conclude that Communication Privacy Management Theory is testable, and it has much promise of utility. It offers an explanation for the delicate process of coordination disclosing and concealing that people perform continually in their relationships with others. Further, CPM may provide insights as that process of coordination becomes even more complex. CPM is needed to explain those daily intrusions into our lives due to technological advances. As technology moves more and more of what we have considered private information into the public realm, we will need to understand the rule-based management system underlying this trend. All these reasons argue well for CPM Theory’s future in communication studies.