Interpersonal Communication Motives (ICM)

Abstract

The Interpersonal Communication Motives (ICM) scale, developed by Rubin, Perse, and Barbato in 1988, is a highly reliable psychological scale designed to measure the underlying reasons why individuals choose to engage in Interpersonal Communication (IC). The scale identifies six distinct dimensions of communicative motives: Pleasure, Affection, Inclusion, Escape, Relaxation, and Control. The ICM scale has been widely used in communication studies to examine how these motives relate to relationship satisfaction, well-being, and media consumption across various relational contexts.

Keywords

Interpersonal Communication Motives, ICM, Pleasure, Affection, Inclusion, Escape, Relaxation, Control, Communication Theory, Self-Report

Authors

Rebecca B. Rubin, Elizabeth M. Perse, Carole A. Barbato

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Interpersonal Communication Motives (ICM) scale is to empirically determine and quantify the various psychological and social reasons, or motives, that drive individuals to initiate or maintain face-to-face communication with others. It moves beyond simply observing communicative behavior by assessing the internal goals and needs that communication fulfills for the individual.

The scale provides a standardized method for researchers to assess how motivational factors influence communication frequency, satisfaction, and the quality of various relationships, including family, friendships, and romantic partnerships. By identifying these root motives, the scale contributes significantly to understanding relational dynamics and communication effectiveness.

Construct

The ICM scale measures the construct of Interpersonal Communication Motivation, which is defined as the internal states or needs that impel individuals toward communication behavior. The scale operationalizes this construct through six empirically derived dimensions, categorized into two broad groups: relational motives (Affection, Inclusion, Control) and personal/functional motives (Pleasure, Relaxation, Escape).

These six dimensions represent distinct goals achieved through communication:

• Pleasure: Communicating for enjoyment, excitement, or stimulation.
• Affection: Communicating to express care, concern, support, or love for others.
• Inclusion: Communicating to satisfy the need for belonging, companionship, or to alleviate loneliness.
• Escape: Communicating to avoid responsibilities, pressures, or unwanted activities.
• Relaxation: Communicating to relieve tension, stress, or to unwind.
• Control: Communicating to influence, dominate, or persuade others to achieve specific instrumental goals.

Validity

The original research by Rubin, Perse, and Barbato (1988) established strong evidence for the construct validity of the ICM scale through rigorous Factor Analysis, confirming that the 28 items loaded cleanly onto the six proposed factors. Subsequent studies have confirmed its predictive validity, showing that specific motives predict communication patterns and relationship outcomes. For instance, high Affection and Inclusion motives are typically associated with higher relationship satisfaction, while high Escape motives may predict less constructive communication behaviors.

Reliability

The ICM scale demonstrates excellent internal consistency reliability across all six factors, indicating that the items measuring each motive are highly correlated. The original reliability statistics, measured using Cronbach’s Alpha, are notably high, suggesting a robust measurement instrument:

• Pleasure: (α = .97)
• Affection: (α = .91)
• Inclusion: (α = .91)
• Escape: (α = .85)
• Relaxation: (α = .96)
• Control: (α = .81)

These consistently high alpha coefficients confirm the strong reliability of the ICM scale for use in communication and social science research.

Factor Analysis

The scale was developed based on extensive theoretical review and empirical testing, primarily utilizing Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) to distill a large initial pool of communication reasons down to the core six-factor solution. This factor structure is orthogonal, meaning that the six motives are distinct and measure independent aspects of communication drive. The six factors—Pleasure, Affection, Inclusion, Escape, Relaxation, and Control—consistently emerge as separate dimensions in various population samples, validating the theoretical framework known as the Interpersonal Communication Motives Model (Graham, Barbato, & Perse, 1993).

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report Psychometric Scale

Format: 28 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale.

Language Available: Primarily English, though translations have been used in cross-cultural studies.

Population Group: General population; frequently used with college students and adults in relational studies.

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults (typically 18+).

Population Details: Originally validated on samples of college students, but applicable to assessing motives within any established relationship context (e.g., parent-child, peer, romantic). The scale often uses specific relational targets (e.g., “I talk to my father because…”) to contextualize the responses.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate the extent to which each statement reflects their reason for communicating with a specified relational partner, using the following scale:

5 – Exactly, 4 – A lot, 3 – Somewhat, 2 – Not much, 1 – Not at all

Keywords

Psychometrics, Communication Satisfaction, Relational Goals, Communication Needs, Factor Structure, Internal Consistency

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Information not available in source content)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Information not available in source content)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Information not available in source content)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1988

Permissions & Fee: The scale is generally considered available for academic and research use, though researchers should contact the primary authors (R. B. Rubin) for official permission regarding large-scale or commercial applications.

The original PDF of research discussing this instrument can be downloaded here: http://www.academicjournals.org/journal/JMCS/article-full-text-pdf/EF7FE7311173

Reference’s

The following academic works detail the conceptualization, measurement, and application of the Interpersonal Communication Motives scale:

• Rubin, R. B., Perse, E. M., & Barbato, C. A. (1988). Conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal communication motives. Human Communication Research, 14, 602-628.
• Rubin, R. B., & Rubin, A. M. (1992). Antecedents of interpersonal communication motivation. Communication Quarterly, 40, 305-317.
• Rubin, A. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1985). Interface of personal and mediated communication: A research agenda. Critical Studies of Mass Communication, 2, 36-53.
• Graham, Elizabeth E.; Barbato, Carole A.; Perse, Elizabeth M. (1993). The Interpersonal Communication Motives Model. Communication Quarterly; 41(2), 172-186.
• Heeman, Vanessa C. (2008). Interpersonal communication motives, satisfaction, and psychological well-being in father-young adult daughter relationships. Kent State University. M.A. thesis.
• Sun, Shaojing., Hullman, Gwen and Wang, Ying. (2011). Communicating in the multichannel age: Interpersonal communication motivation, interaction involvement and channel affinity. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 3(1), 7-15.

Items of the Interpersonal Communication Motives (ICM)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. because it’s fun.
2. because I just need to talk about my problems sometimes.
3. to help others.
4. to get something I don’t have.
5. to have a good time.
6. because it’s thrilling.
7. because I need someone to talk to or be with.
8. because it relaxes me.
9. because it allows me to unwind.
10. to tell others what to do.
11. because it’s stimulating.
12. because I want someone to do something for me.
13. because it’s entertaining.
14. because I have nothing better to do.
15. to get away from what I am doing.
16. because I enjoy it.
17. because it peps me up.
18. because it’s reassuring to know someone is there.
19. to put off something I should be doing.
20. to let others know I care.
21. to get away from pressures and responsibilities.
22. to thank them.
23. because it makes me feel less lonely.
24. to show others encouragement.
25. because it’s exciting.
26. because I’m concerned about them.
27. because it’s a pleasant rest.
28. Because it makes me feel less tense.

The items are grouped into the following factors (example phrasing provided here for context, often targeted toward a specific relational partner, e.g., “I talk to my father because…”):

• Pleasure: I talk to my father because it’s fun. I talk to my father because it’s exciting. I talk to my father to have a good time. I talk to my father because it’s thrilling. I talk to my father because it’s stimulating. I talk to my father because it’s entertaining. I talk to my father because I enjoy it. I talk to my father because it peps me up.
• Affection: I talk to my father to help him. I talk to my father to let him know I care about his feelings. I talk to my father to thank him. I talk to my father to show him encouragement. I talk to my father because I’m concerned about him.
• Inclusion: I talk to my father because I need someone to talk or to be with. I talk to my father because I just need to talk about my problems sometimes. I talk to my father because it makes me feel less lonely. I talk to my father because it’s reassuring to know he is there.
• Escape: I talk to my father to put off something I should be doing. I talk to my father to get away from what I am doing. I talk to my father because I have nothing better to do. I talk to my father to get away from pressures and responsibility.
• Relaxation: I talk to my father because it relaxes me. I talk to my father because it allows me to unwind. I talk to my father because it’s a pleasant rest. I talk to my father because it makes me feel less tense.
• Control: I talk to my father because I want him to do something for me. I talk to my father to tell him what to do. I talk to my father to get something I don’t have.