The teacher with the more desirable interpersonal style showed overall coordination consistent with the complementarity principle, while the less desirable teacher's coordination did not¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Ethan's classroom cross-correlations (.71 Communion, -.86 Agency) were consistent with the complementarity principle, whereas Sam's (-.39 Communion, -.06 Agency) were not consistent on Communion and only very weakly on Agency. → Pennings 2017

Evidence¶

Pennings 2017¶

Pennings, H. J. M. (2017). Using a Complexity Approach to Study the Interpersonal Dynamics in Teacher-Student Interactions: A Case Study of Two Teachers. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 14(2). https://complicityjournal.org doi:10.29173/cmplct29338

q2 · i? · qualitative · r2

Multiple case study of two teachers; overall coordination computed as cross-correlation between the 1,176 half-second measurements of teacher and student behavior. Ethan's coordination was "consistent with the principle of interpersonal complementarity" on both dimensions.

"for Ethan's classroom was .71 for Communion and -.86 for Agency, which is consistent with the principle of interpersonal complementarity (i.e., negative for Agency and positive for Communion)."

Pennings 2017 (2)¶

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Same case-study analysis for Sam's classroom: the cross-correlations were "not consistent with the complementarity principle" on Communion and only very weakly consistent on Agency, contrasting with Ethan's pattern.

"For Sam's classroom, overall coordination was -.39 for Communion and -.06 for Agency, which on the Communion dimension is not consistent with the complementarity principle, and on the Agency dimension very weakly consistent with the complementarity principle."

Discussion¶

Teacher-student cyclical entrainment was considerably higher in the desirable-style teacher's classroom than in the struggling-style teacher's classroom — related
Phase analysis showed Ethan leading the interaction with sameness in Communion and oppositeness in Agency, while Sam led in Communion but followed in Agency — related
The hypothesis that both teachers can refrain from complementarity when facing hostile student behavior could not be confirmed — related
During the early stage of therapy, more severely maladjusted clients elicit higher levels of therapist complementarity — related
The four-phase model predicts favored interpersonal styles appear early and style flexibility grows with accumulated specific experience — related
Athletes' personality affects coaches' perceptions of relationship quality, with more difficult personalities linked to lower closeness, commitment and complementarity — related
Observed interaction frequencies support the Interaction Matrix cell weightings, with the most interactions in the highest-weighted cells — related

Page metadata

Field	Value
`type`	`claim`
`id`	`desirable-interpersonal-style-overall-coordination-complementarity`
`title`	`The teacher with the more desirable interpersonal style showed overall coordination consistent with the complementarity principle, while the less desirable teacher's coordination did not`
`description`	`The teacher with the more desirable interpersonal style showed overall coordination consistent with the complementarity principle, while the less desirable teacher's coordination did not`
`status`	`review`
`evidence_strength`	`moderate`
`newest_evidence`	`2017`
`source_checked`	`2026-10-20`
`generated`	by `process:wiki-ingest` on `2026-09-26`
`trust`	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
`sources`	2 — `pennings-2017`, `pennings-2017-2`

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.