Noise Interference with Interpersonal Communication

froggermom02

Ch1.docx

Home >Education homework help > Noise Interference with Interpersonal Communication

Ch 1: Introduction to Interpersonal Comm…

Introduction to Interpersonal Communication

Two women talking in a coffee shop.

KT images/Taxi/Getty Images

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, you should be able to

· Understand the specific components of communication.

· Describe the overarching models of the communication process.

· Define interpersonal communication, including its principles, barriers, and benefits.

· Understand how we can develop communication competence.

· Explain the principles of competent interpersonal communication and apply these techniques to their own interpersonal communication encounters.

Pg. 2

Introduction

Humans are social beings. We depend on other people to meet our needs, and we form and interact in organized groups such as families, neighborhoods, teams, clubs, and societies to spend time with and assist one another. Communication with other people helps us understand ourselves, others, and our world. Our bonds with siblings, friends, romantic partners, neighbors, colleagues, and classmates give our lives meaning, even when these bonds challenge and frustrate us. For these reasons, how we communicate, connect with others, and build and maintain relationships is the subject of this text.

You probably know from your own experiences that communication can go awry, and any number of barriers can arise. Perhaps the receiver, the recipient of a message, cannot hear or does not pay attention to the message being sent. Maybe equipment used to transmit the message fails, such as when a call from a smartphone is dropped. You can also likely recall instances of successful communication when the interaction resulted in positive change or mutual understanding. Consider the following conversation:

Kim sends Pat an e-mail: Hey, hope you’re having a good day. What are we doing for dinner tonight?

Pat replies via e-mail: You never told me you were going to be home early enough to have dinner together, so I’m not sure.

Kim, via e-mail: I did. I told you yesterday.

Pat, via e-mail: I don’t remember you saying anything about being home for dinner. I’m leaving work now, so text my cell.

Kim replies via text message: Ugh, this is an annoying way to carry on this conversation. But I still have to say, you never listen when I tell you something.

Pat does not reply because he is driving home.

Kim, via text message: Are you ignoring me?

Pat checks his phone once he is home and sees Kim’s text. He calls Kim, who is now on her way home from work: Hey, it’s me. I just got your text because I was driving. I wasn’t ignoring you.

Kim: Fine, whatever. I’m almost home. I’ll talk to you then. Bye.

Once they are both home, Kim and Pat continue their conversation face-to-face.

Pat: You’re making a big deal out of nothing. Can’t we just figure out what we’re doing for dinner? I’m hungry.

Kim (rolling her eyes): Oh, I’m making a big deal out of nothing?

You have likely engaged in a similar conversation. The interaction contains multiple elements of interpersonal communication (IPC), a type of communication that involves two individuals interacting face-to-face or via mediated channels. We will use Kim and Pat’s interaction as an example throughout this chapter to illustrate the complexity of their seemingly everyday encounter.

In this chapter, we examine the nature of communication and its importance in your life. We discuss several important definitions, elements, and models of communication and briefly explore the foundation of communication as an academic discipline. In addition, we define interpersonal communication and communication competence, investigate the barriers of interpersonal communication, and the benefits of studying it, and consider the principles of being a competent interpersonal communicator.

Pg. 3

1.1 What Is Communication?

Communication, in its various forms, channels, and contexts, is a fundamental aspect of being human. In fact, as newborns, our first cry is a message to the world that we have arrived, and as infants, we are often consoled by a gentle touch or the soothing voice of our caregivers. We soon learn to express our thoughts, feelings, needs, and desires through behavior and language, to listen and respond to others when they communicate with us, and to use communication to build, maintain, and even end relationships.

The word communication can be traced back to the Latin word communicare, which means “to join or unite,” “to connect,” “to participate in,” or “to share with all.” Other words that emerge from this root word include common, commune, communion, and community. Reflecting its roots, this text defines communication as a process where two or more individuals strive to create shared meaning using verbal and nonverbal messages in a variety of contexts. This definition highlights five primary characteristics of communication:

· Two or more people are involved.

· It is a process.

· There is an attempt to create shared meaning.

· Both verbal and nonverbal messages influence interactions.

· It occurs in a variety of contexts.

We discuss the intricacies of each element next.

1. Communication Involves Two or More People

Communication requires a minimum of two individuals. In other words, we cannot communicate unless there is at least one other person to interact with. When two individuals communicate, be it face-to-face, by text, via social media platforms such as Twitter, or by video-calling services such as FaceTime, they are engaging in interpersonal communication. Certainly, communication occurs between more than two individuals, and mediated channels, such as television and social media, can even allow us to communicate with millions of people. Use of a mediated communication channel simply means that some form of information technology is employed to help a message travel from the sender, the person who initiates the interaction, to the receiver(s). Take one of Kim’s text messages to Pat about their dinner, for example: A smartphone is needed to propel what she is communicating to him. When Kim and Pat are at home together, they communicate face-to-face, and their communication is no longer mediated. Finally, talking to ourselves or internally exploring who we are as individuals is called intrapersonal communication. We evaluate intrapersonal communication in more detail in Chapter 2.

2. Communication Is a Process

In 1960, communication theorist David Berlo described communication as a constantly evolving interaction or activity that changes each of us and changes our relationships over time. The word “process” might bring to mind an action that has some purpose or is directed to some end—an action that is dynamic, ongoing, and ever changing. When you meet someone for the first time, for example, you approach each other as strangers. The communication that occurs during this first meeting influences or shapes your next meeting. If the first meeting was a positive experience, you will generally expect the second interaction to be positive as well. On the other hand, if the first meeting did not go well, you may approach the second meeting with some trepidation because you expect to have a similar experience.

Communication is a continuous and complex process affected by past events, influenced by how the current interaction unfolds, and impacting interactions to come as well as the future of the relationship. Because communication is ongoing, we continually work to build, maintain, alter, and sometimes even terminate relationships. Over time, we change and others change, and thus our communication within our relationships changes.

A father sitting on stairs and listening to his son.

Jose Luis Pelaez/The Image Bank/Getty Images

A primary goal of communication is to share meaning and connect with others.

3. Communication Attempts to Create Shared Meaning

The purpose of human communication is to help people generate and share their thoughts, feelings, experiences, beliefs, opinions, or anything they can think to express. People communicate in the hope that such ideas have meaning for others too and that they will understand.

As an example of how people can share meaning through words, the symbols of language, picture the following event:

A black bear cub, apparently abandoned by its mother, wandered into a rural neighborhood and lived in the trees there for more than five days. Because the animal showed no signs of leaving, authorities were called to capture the bear and remove it from the property. They shot the cub with a tranquilizer gun, but the cub scurried up a large tree and fell asleep. The tree was too tall for any ladder to reach and too wide to encircle with a safety harness, a requirement if an authority were to climb, but the cub was in danger of falling to an almost certain death at any moment. For approximately one hour, neighbors and wildlife officials anxiously waited for a resolution. Then the cub awakened and began to move. The small branch on which the cub rested broke, and the bear suddenly dropped a few feet to a second branch. The cub dangled high above the ground, holding onto the branch with its front paws. Slowly it lost its grip and dropped toward the ground, bouncing off two or three tree branches on the way down. As it fell, wildlife officers ran toward the tree, gripping a tarp tightly, and caught the cub safely using the open canvas.

Although you were not present to witness this event, you can easily visualize it because of a shared language and shared use of symbols. When we talk with other people about an experience, however, the communication is only an abstraction of that experience. For example, a reporter who witnessed this event might write a story about the cub, sharing her perception of the situation as it unfolded. She might report as many facts as possible, but she also might make it sound like a more dramatic event than it was to keep readers interested.

That story, however, is just one person’s representation, which is a simplified version of the entire occurrence. Each witness noticed or focused on different things during the experience. For example, the wildlife official standing directly under the tree focused her attention on where to best place the tarp to catch the cub. Meanwhile, a neighbor, positioned at a greater distance from the tree, might instead be better able to view the whole scene, including the potential damage to the tree, nearby structures, or cars if the cub did happen to fall. Each individual’s story would be slightly different even though there would also be a great deal of shared meaning about specific elements of the event. We will return to the importance of these different meanings when we discuss culture and perceptions later in this text.

One of the primary goals of human communication is to share meaning and connect with others, but this is not always easy. We can look up a word in a dictionary, but the definition does not necessarily account for the word’s unique meaning for the person who uses it. Meaning is not in the message itself; meaning is in the communicator, with the ultimate goal being that it will be shared between those in the interaction. We each respond to messages based on personal experiences, cultures, and interpretations. But this can make communication difficult because verbal and nonverbal messages mean something slightly different to each of us. It is generally easier to create shared meaning when we have an established relationship with someone because that person has shared experiences with us. Communication is thus considered successful when meaning is generally shared with others and all parties come to a mutual understanding about the content of the messages exchanged.

4. Communication Is Verbal and Nonverbal

Messages are the actual pieces of information exchanged between individuals in an interaction, and these messages take two broad forms: verbal and nonverbal. Verbal communication is, put simply, the use of language or words (both written and spoken) to communicate. Language provides us with the unique ability to create, use, and exchange common words or symbols that represent objects and events. Symbols are words, pictures, sounds, marks, or objects used to represent particular ideas, objects, or qualities. We can also use written and spoken language to describe past, present, and future events and to wish, dream, and imagine objects that do not exist or are not immediately present (Burgoon, Buller, & Woodall, 1996).

Nonverbal communication includes visual and vocal means, other than language, used to communicate. There are eight distinct forms of nonverbal communication (Burgoon, Guerrero, & Manusov, 2011):

· physical appearance and attractiveness

· body movement, including posture, facial expressions, and eye contact (kinesics)

· physical contact with another through touch (haptics)

· personal space and distance from one another (proxemics)

· voice and the way something is said, including tone, pitch, rate, height, and even silence (vocalics)

· time and the way it is used (chronemics)

· scents or odors (olfactics)

· use or display of objects used to create and shape messages (artifactics)

Although verbal and nonverbal communication are often studied separately, they are intertwined and either complement or contradict one another. Their interplay can change the nature and interpretation of the interaction.

Think back to the example of Kim and Pat’s communication at the beginning of the chapter. They were clearly using verbal communication via language in their e-mails and texts, but they also engaged in nonverbal communication, including the tones and volumes of their voices, use of eye contact, gestures, personal distance, and touch. At times, the verbal and nonverbal messages they were using may have communicated the same thing. For example, Kim’s voice might have sounded angry and been at a higher pitch than normal, and she might have rolled her eyes when she texted, “Fine, whatever. I’m almost home myself. I’ll talk to you then. Bye.” Maybe Pat’s messages offered different or conflicting meanings if he had smiled and spoken in a calm tone of voice when he said, “You are making a big deal out of nothing.” Even Pat’s silence when he was driving home was perceived by Kim as a nonverbal message of being ignored.

Communication via e-mail, text message, and social media can involve different forms of nonverbal communication such as using capital letters to emphasize a point, exclamation marks to convey excitement, and photos to depict who we are online. Additionally, gifs (graphical interchange format), soundless video clips that loop autonomously, and emojis, digital icons that represent emotions, images, or ideas, can be used to replace physical facial expressions and other things we wish to communicate and help people interpret the meaning of a particular statement. We will return to the importance of verbal and nonverbal messages in face-to-face and mediated contexts in Chapter 4.

Two young men walking and laughing together at a music festival.

Klaus Vedfelt/Tax/Getty Images

Context, such as the setting in which communication takes place, influences how people communicate. Consider how the conversation between these two people might differ if they were in an office instead of at a music festival.

5. Communication Occurs in a Variety of Contexts

The context, or the situation or setting in which communication takes place, affects what we expect to hear and see, the meaning of what is said, and whether and how we communicate. When we speak of context, we must consider that people communicate differently in different settings. For example, you would not communicate and behave at a party the same way you would at work. You may talk and laugh loudly at a party, yell to someone from across the room, and likely dress casually, but you would probably not exhibit these same behaviors in the workplace.

Any number of contextual cues can influence communication. For example, the time and place of the interaction are important considerations. Does the interaction occur on a weekend night or during a weekday? Does the interaction take place face-to-face or via a mediated technology such as Skype? In addition, the cultures of each communicator, as well as the culture in which the interaction is taking place, are often consciously and subconsciously taken into account. Culture, which we will discuss in more depth in Chapter 3, involves the traditions, beliefs, and standards for behaviors that are passed down from one generation to the next.

Our psychological state and who we are as people also affects our communication. Our self-concept, or our idea of who we are that is created by what we think about ourselves and how others respond to us, may impact how we perceive situations. For example, you might have a better time at a party right after receiving an excellent grade in a course because you feel better about yourself than you might after receiving a poor grade. In addition, the social situation, the participants in the interaction, and their relational history influence communication.

As you have learned, communication occurs in a particular context, which includes the time, place, and people involved in the interaction. All of these contextual aspects fit into the larger context of culture. Overall, it is important to recognize that context often significantly shapes communication.

Pg. 4

1.2 Two Models of Communication

Communication as an academic discipline has both a long and a short history. Broadly, the study of communication is rooted in the traditions of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and ancient Greek philosophy. Specifically, the art of persuasion, known as rhetoric, promoted citizen participation in democracy during this time. Rhetoric remains an important area in communication today. In contrast, the modern study of communication, and the emergence of interpersonal communication in particular, began in the 20th century. In the first four decades of that century, speech and oratory aspects of communication were studied at American universities in different social science and humanities departments such as anthropology, English, political science, and sociology. However, from 1940 to the mid-1960s, the study of communication started to evolve into a distinct discipline.

It was also in the 1960s that the field of interpersonal communication “came into its own as an identifiable academic discipline” (Bryant & Pribanic-Smith, 2010, p. 26). The early focus was on persuasion, influence, and group communication, but there was also a growing interest during the 1970s in how cognition was related to interpersonal interaction. The study of interpersonal communication continued to advance between the 1970s and 1980s, with substantial growth in university courses and the founding of professional associations and journals (Bryant & Pribanic-Smith, 2010). The field of interpersonal communication continues to grow and evolve with the ever-changing nature of social interactions thanks to the popularity of social media and technological conduits that facilitate interpersonal communication, such as texting and video chatting.

Since the 1940s, when the study of communication split from other academic disciplines, communication scholars proposed their own theories and models to explain communication interactions. Theories are claims and beliefs researchers develop and then test in controlled studies or in real-world situations. When communication scholars create and test theories, they provide information about the communication process that is based on research and evidence. Such practices also help advance communication as an academic discipline. Researchers also create models to illustrate communication concepts and theories. Models are simple representations, in an ideal form, of a process or an object. Although models provide a simplified view of something that is typically more complex, they are useful because they clarify the nature of a phenomenon or a process. A model also highlights the elements a scholar believes are particularly important and allows us to examine how an element is related to other parts of the model. Theories and models are important tools to illustrate the researcher’s systematic thinking about a topic.

The following interactive scenario demonstrates elements of communication with follow up discussion and questions.

With new research findings in interpersonal communication, researchers expanded upon the discipline’s preliminary models and theories. To illustrate the evolution of these communication models, we will discuss two types of communication models: (1) the linear model and (2) the transaction model. Let’s examine these models and discuss how they differ.

The Linear Model of Communication

In 1948, Bell Telephone Company engineer and mathematician Claude Shannon was assigned the task of determining the most efficient way to transmit electrical signals from one location to another. As a result, Shannon developed one of the most influential early linear models of communication. He called his model the mathematical theory of communication, and it was originally published in The Bell System Technical Journal. Shannon later worked with mathematician Warren Weaver to create a description of this communication model that was accessible to the general public, which is known today as the Shannon–Weaver model of communication (see Figure 1.1). A number of linear models were developed at this time, but the Shannon–Weaver model is the most significant.

Figure 1.1: The Shannon–Weaver model of communication

The linear model of communication, developed by Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver, was originally created to represent mechanical communication and was the first model to visually depict the communication process.

A flow chart depicting the major components of communication and their overall roles in the communication process, as described in the nearby text.

Source: Shannon, C. E. (1948, July, October). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 27, pp. 379–423. Courtesy of Nokia Corporation and AT&T Archives © 1948 Nokia. All Rights Reserved.

Shannon postulated that all communication could be broken down into three components: an information source, a channel or path, and a destination (Weaver & Shannon, 1963). In this model, the information source is the sender, who has a message to transmit. This message is transformed into a signal that travels along a channel (the medium or the means through which a message is transmitted) before reaching its destination. The transmitter and receiver shown in the Shannon–Weaver model were devices such as telephone handsets that sent and received the information signal. The Shannon–Weaver model focused on the mechanism of transmitting electrical signals, not on the content of the message. Because it focused on the mechanical and technical issues involved in message transmission, the model did not explain the complexities of human communication. Nevertheless, Shannon made two important contributions to the field of communication.

First, Shannon defined and quantified the sometimes-imprecise notion of information, which is defined as stimuli from individuals’ surroundings that contribute to their beliefs and knowledge (Brashers, Goldsmith, & Hsieh, 2002). He believed that telephone signals, radio waves, photographs, film, and other media could all be considered information, and this information could be encoded in binary digits, or bits, which would enable relay circuits to perform complex mathematical operations and to transmit this digital information without error. Almost 50 years elapsed before Shannon’s information concept had practical application, but today this concept forms the operational basis used for computers and other electronic devices, making items such as mobile devices, DVDs, and broadband communication possible. In fact, Shannon is now referred to as the father of information technology and is credited with single-handedly creating today’s digital revolution (Waldrop, 2001).

Second, the Shannon–Weaver model introduced the idea of noise into the communication process. Shannon defined noise as anything that interferes with, corrupts, or changes the communication signal as it travels through a channel. In essence, noise is anything in the background that impacts or affects how we interpret a communication message. Again, Shannon primarily focused on technical noise in the signal transmission, such as static on a telephone line. But he recognized that communicators could experience semantic noise, which occurs when messages are understood or interpreted differently or when interference arises because of the language used by one or more of the communication participants. We will return to the concept of noise in the next section.

In the Shannon–Weaver model, the sender of the message is the primary and only active participant in the communication process. The sender is responsible for clearly and accurately communicating to the receiver, who passively accepts whatever message the sender transmits. If the communicated message fails to produce shared meaning or desired results due to noise, then researchers simply examine how the sender formed the message or develop methods for improving message transmission. If we use the linear model to analyze Kim and Pat’s conversation about what to have for dinner, we might assume Kim is responsible for clear communication and she is at fault when Pat does not know that she is available to have dinner with him. We might suggest that Kim’s question, “What are we doing for dinner tonight?”, should be more explicit or clearer, such as, “I’m available for dinner with you tonight after all—do you want to do something?”

In the 1950s and early 1960s, researchers adapted the Shannon–Weaver model and applied its concepts to the process of human communication. Several scholars during this time made contributions to our knowledge of interpersonal communication. One model in particular still affects our understanding of interpersonal communication today: the transaction model.

The Transaction Model of Communication

As communication became established as a distinct discipline, researchers recognized that communication was not inherently linear and that both senders and receivers were influential, active participants in the communication process. As a result, researchers developed the interaction model of communication. The interaction model depicted the sender and the receiver, as the linear model of communication does, but also emphasized both participants’ sequential turns when they exchanged messages.

As the study of communication progressed, researchers recognized it was not necessary to receive a message before sending a message. Communicators send and receive messages at the same time and had mutual influence during the interaction. For example, while one person is speaking, the second person could smile or frown and thus send a nonverbal message. The two participants in the interaction are both simultaneously a sender and a receiver of messages. Instead of comparing communication to shooting an arrow, as in the linear model, or hitting a tennis ball back and forth, as in the interaction model, communication can be more accurately described as a dance. Researchers acknowledged that participants would rely on each other’s cues and that their combined movements influenced the direction of their interaction. This interplay between the communicators is a transaction, and these later models of communication are known as transaction models.

A transaction model of interpersonal communication identifies four major components of the communication process:

· Both parties are active participants who simultaneously serve as senders and receivers.

· Information flows in both directions.

· There are both verbal and nonverbal messages.

· Communication takes place to meet the needs of both people.

The sender and receiver are mutually responsible for the creation of meaning. The two parties must negotiate to achieve as much shared meaning as possible. Elements of the transaction model—feedback, context, and noise, among others—are detailed here. Each of these can influence shared meaning between the parties.

Sender and Receiver

Though senders and receivers are addressed as separate elements of communication, each party in an interaction should be considered both a sender and a receiver, or, simply, a communicator. The sender is the source of the communication. That initiation can be as simple as eye contact or as formal as a mailed wedding invitation. Most communication researchers agree that senders can initiate an interaction either intentionally or unintentionally. For example, if you call “hello!” across the street to your neighbor, but a cable repairman nearby thinks you are calling to him instead and says hello as well, you have unintentionally begun an interaction with the repairman.

Recall that the receiver is the recipient of the message the sender transmits. As noted previously, early communication models considered the receiver a passive participant in the communication process, but researchers today believe the receiver is actively engaged in the communication process. Communication participants are simultaneously senders and receivers.

Before communication can occur, the sender must first encode the idea she wants to communicate or put the idea into some form or code the other person can understand. Therefore, encoding involves the creation of meaning. Language is a type of verbal communication code. Nonverbal communications, such as gestures, eye contact, and touch, are codes as well. If the other person does not understand the message, she will not be able to decode or interpret the message in the way the sender intends. This is called miscommunication, and it is likely that there is a barrier present that is causing this miscommunication to occur. For example, placing the thumb and forefinger together to form a circle is a nonverbal code that can mean “OK” in the United States. However, the same gesture is considered offensive in Brazil and Germany (Hayden, 2007).

Message

In the communication process, the message is the content of the communication itself—the idea the sender wishes to communicate to the receiver. Messages are

· perceived via one or more of our five senses (sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell);

· planned, unintentional, or somewhere in between; and

· communicated via both verbal and nonverbal codes.

Messages are only understood if the idea is encoded by the sender and decoded by the receiver in a similar manner and if shared meaning is achieved.

According to interpersonal communication scholars, messages also contain both content and relational dimensions (Watzlawick, Beavin, & Jackson, 1967). The content dimension of the message is the information the sender wants to communicate to the receiver. The relational dimension of the message is the relationship between the two communicators. The nature of the relationship can include factors such as who has more or less power, how much communicators like or dislike each other, and the feelings one or both communicators experience during the interaction. Typically, the content dimension is transmitted through verbal communication, and the relational dimension is more subtly expressed via nonverbal communication.

A person talking and gesturing with her hands at a meeting.

Blue Images/Corbis/Getty Images

We can use both verbal codes and nonverbal codes, such as hand gestures, to communicate a message.

When compared with the content dimension of a message, the relational dimension is often less clear or ambiguous and may require verbal verification. For example, if your boss says, “I’d like to see you in my office,” the content of the message is clear and simple. However, the relational dimension may cause you to feel concern. Maybe you analyze your boss’s tone of voice or facial expressions. Perhaps you mentally review your recent work and interactions with your boss to predict if the meeting will be a positive or a negative experience. As you can see from this example, verbal and nonverbal messages and the content and relational dimensions of messages all affect message encoding and decoding.

Channel

Multiple channels can be used to transmit messages in an interaction. For example, when two people talk face-to-face, they use the auditory channel when they speak and listen, the visual channel when they observe each other’s gestures and facial expressions, and the tactile channel when there is physical contact. In addition, the channel could be mediated in some way, which, as noted earlier, means that a form of information technology is intervening between the sender and the receiver in the communication process. When communication occurs via a mediated channel, other channel options are often limited. For example, mediated channels would easily support the visual and auditory channels described above, but make tactile (touch) and olfactory (scent) channels impossible to use.

Feedback

As mentioned previously, for communication to be effective, the message must have the same or similar meaning—a shared understanding—for both communicators. We cannot be sure if the message sent is the same as the message received until we assess the feedback, another element of the communication process. Feedback is any information a communicator gets from others in response to a message. Feedback can be verbal or nonverbal and often includes elements of both. For example, if you tell a child his lunch is ready, he might race into the house (nonverbal) and shout “hooray” (verbal)—both elements are forms of feedback. Feedback is an important component in the communication process because it is the method we use to gauge the success of the communication. Feedback also provides the opportunity to alter our messages and to try to communicate again if the previous message is not understood or if shared understanding is not achieved.

Noise

Every day we are presented with countless messages and sensory experiences, from signs and advertisements to interactions with strangers. These messages or sensations inevitably influence how both individuals interpret the interaction, and are thus classified as noise. Recall that noise was first discussed in relation to Shannon and Weaver’s linear model of communication, though Shannon’s primary view of noise was technological in nature. Communication scholars have since determined there are four specific types of noise that, though often unrelated to the message and usually occurring in the background, can impact how that message is interpreted.

· Physical noise includes distractions that originate from the environment and external stimuli rather than from the communicators—such as a ringing or vibrating phone, traffic outside your window, other students talking during class, or even spam e-mail. Physical noise is thus an external form of noise.

· Psychological noise occurs when one or both communicators’ cognitions or mental states interfere with how messages are interpreted. Biases, prejudices, stereotypes, and even extreme emotions such as rage are examples of psychological noise. Psychological noise is thus an internal form of noise and is most likely to occur when a communicator has extreme views or even a viewpoint on the opposite end of the spectrum. Our own anxieties, worries, and self-doubts can be forms of psychological noise as well.

· Physiological noise occurs when one or both communicators have an impairment that influences communication interpretation. Examples of physiological impairment include visual or speech impairments, difficulty with or loss of hearing, memory loss, and mental health issues that interfere with one’s ability to encode or decode messages. Biases such as racial and gender prejudices and extreme emotional experiences in the heat of an argument can also be examples of physiological noise.

· Semantic noise occurs when one or both communicators assign different meanings to a message. One example of semantic noise involves communicators who speak different languages—for example, one individual only speaks English, and the other only understands Spanish. Other examples can include different interpretations of a nonverbal signal, such as the aforementioned “OK” hand gesture in the U.S. versus Brazil and Germany. Use of complex terms or jargon can also create semantic noise. Even speech that is too vague or ambiguous can lead to semantic noise due to misinterpretation.

Any or all of these forms of noise can be present in an interaction. Obviously, the more noise that there is during an interaction, the more difficulty the communicators will have focusing on the messages that they are exchanging and on creating shared meaning. In some cases, asking for clarification, learning unfamiliar jargon, attempting to understand potential cultural differences prior to visiting a new place, turning off smartphone notifications, or simply using noise-canceling headphones can assist in managing noise. Though we cannot fully eliminate noise from our interactions, knowing that noise can affect our communication can help us anticipate and deal with it.

Context

The transaction model acknowledges that communication does not take place in a vacuum; rather, a simple shift in where or when an interaction takes place can significantly alter it. As defined earlier in the chapter, context is the circumstance in which an interaction occurs, and it surrounds and infuses the interaction and affects the communicators’ messages. A number of contextual aspects—including time, place, environment, the psychological dimension of each communicator, and culture—can play an integral role in shaping or changing the messages being shared.

Together, these elements combine to illustrate the process of communication as depicted by the transaction model of communication. For example, Kim and Pat are both senders and receivers in their interaction. Their messages are the things they say both verbally and nonverbally to each other, and they used both mediated (e-mail, text messages, and calls) and face-to-face channels to communicate these messages. When Kim said to Pat, “Fine, whatever,” she is providing him with feedback that indicates she is not being considerate of or taking seriously the message Pat has sent. There could be multiple types of noise present, including physical noise in the form of distractions at work and while on the road and even psychological noise as both Kim and Pat became more angry and frustrated. Finally, the context could involve the time of day—that it was close to dinnertime—and how each felt about the other and the relationship they share. The transaction model thus is useful because it not only describes each of these elements but helps us identify the role of each element in a given interaction.

The Transaction Model of Communication

Narrated video explaining the transaction model of communication.

Pg. 5

1.3 What Is Interpersonal Communication?

This text focuses on interpersonal communication: the building block for all other types of communication. This communication involves the smallest number of communicators—two, also known as a dyad. It can be unplanned, such as when people unexpectedly meet, exchange greetings, and have an impromptu conversation. It can also be planned, such as when two people arrange to sit down for coffee at a certain time and place to talk about a problem. Interpersonal communication can take place in an informal setting—a home, a yard, or a supermarket, for instance. Interpersonal communication can also occur in a formal setting, such as an employer’s office or a classroom. Interpersonal communication can even take place via mediated channels like smartphones, computers, or social media.

Aspects of a typical interaction can be both planned and unplanned, both formal and informal. For example, a doctor–patient encounter would likely be considered a primarily formal and planned interaction. However, this interaction also can include informal greetings and chitchat when the doctor first enters the examination room. If the patient provides information about his symptoms during the exam that the doctor did not anticipate, unplanned communication will occur. If the patient follows up later with the doctor via e-mail, the interaction will span both face-to-face and mediated channels. As this example illustrates, the study of interpersonal communication is important because such interactions are complex, multilayered, and can reveal a lot about the communication process.

Goals of Interpersonal Communication

As social animals, humans want and need connections with other people. We communicate to accomplish any number of mutual goals and to relate to one another. Specifically, interpersonal communication is a social process, and we usually communicate for one of four primary goals:

1. to meet human needs

2. to accomplish an objective via an interaction (an instrumental goal)

3. to present ourselves to others in a specific way (a self-presentation goal)

4. to build and maintain relationships with others (a relationship goal)

Meeting Human Needs

One of the most basic reasons people interact with others is to satisfy human needs. In 1943, psychologist Abraham Maslow developed a theory of human motivation, proposing that all humans have an essential nature and a set of basic human needs that motivate us to seek psychological health and full humanness, or self-actualization (Maslow, 1968). The hierarchy of human needs that Maslow identified is usually represented as a pyramid. As the arrow in Figure 1.2 indicates, Maslow theorized that human needs emerge from the bottom of the pyramid and ascend thereon. Lower-level needs must be satisfied first, and higher-level needs only arise once basic needs are realized. Basic physiological needs—the necessities for life such as food, water, and shelter—are the strongest needs. Maslow believed the first reason to communicate is for survival. Communication enables us to call attention to ourselves, to warn others of danger, and to exchange critical information to meet these physiological needs. Then we can turn our attention to the need for safety and security. We may have enough food to eat today, but we also need to feel secure that we will have food, water, and shelter tomorrow and the day after as well. Once these safety needs are met, we can then address social needs such as the need to belong. Friendship, acceptance by others, and the ability to both give and receive love are powerful needs for all humans, and they drive much of our interpersonal communication. After we satisfy these needs, we are then motivated to fulfill esteem needs, such as the need for recognition, the pride of accomplishment, and the satisfaction of self-respect. Finally, self-actualization is at the top of Maslow’s hierarchy. A self-actualized person is able to recognize and pursue dreams, desires, and goals and to strive to reach her full potential as an individual. This drive for self-actualization is only activated, however, when lower-level needs are met.

Figure 1.2: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

Basic needs, those closer to the bottom of the pyramid, must be met before one is in the position to seek out self-actualization.

A segmented pyramid depicting the five categories of needs identified by Abraham Maslow, as described in the nearby text. From the bottom of the pyramid to the top, the five segments are as follows: physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, and self-actualization.

Interpersonal communication and interactions with others can help us satisfy these different human needs (“Maslow’s Hierarchy,” 2009). For example, babies cry when they are hungry, communicating their basic human need for food. A student starting at a new school will reach out to make friends by attending orientation activities, striving to fulfill her social needs. An adult whose basic needs are met might schedule visits with a therapist to discuss how to reach his full potential, or become more self-actualized.

Accomplishing an Objective

Communication researchers Ruth Anne Clark and Jesse Delia (1979) put forward an influential set of three goals in their research on strategic communication. These three goals—instrumental, self-presentational, and relational—have been studied extensively by many communication scholars in multiple contexts, such as conflict, social support, and mediated encounters.

The first of these goals is to accomplish an objective, or an instrumental goal. Here, someone communicates primarily because they have a practical purpose. Returning to our encounter at the beginning of the chapter, when Kim asks Pat what they are doing for dinner that night, she is accomplishing her objective of finding out their meal plan. Incidentally, Kim is also meeting her human physiological need for food with this question, showing that one communication message can accomplish multiple goals.

Presenting Ourselves to Others

In addition to interacting with other people to meet personal needs, another primary function of interpersonal communication is to (attempt to) manage how the other person in the interaction perceives who we are as a person, otherwise known as a self-presentation goal. If we say “excuse me” to someone who is in our way, preventing us from getting past, our self-presentation goal is to be polite. Alternately, if we roughly shove them out of the way, our self-presentation goal is to be rude. In Kim and Pat’s interaction, Kim’s question (“Oh, I’m making a big deal out of nothing?”) at the end of the interaction is her defensive response to how Pat is describing her—thus, the goal of her message is her self-presentation.

The image that we seek to present to others also varies greatly according to our cultural background. Communication is one of the most important ways that societies maintain and pass on knowledge about their society and culture. When we communicate with others, we learn about what is important in their culture, and we also learn about our own cultural heritage. Think about a recent time when you visited another culture—it could have been a foreign country, a different region of the United States, or even a group or association with interests that differ from yours. You may have tried to learn about this culture before your visit, possibly by reading books, checking on websites, and asking friends who are members of or have previously visited that culture. When immersed in that culture, you likely were highly engaged and observant—you more carefully observed your and others’ nonverbal behaviors as well as elements of the environment that could give you better insight into your immediate surroundings and how they reflect that culture. In other words, your self-presentation goal in this example was to fit in to the culture and to be respectful and educated about their values and customs.

Building and Maintaining Relationships

A final important function of interpersonal communication is to help build and maintain relationships with other people. According to Clark and Delia (1979), this is a relational goal. Because humans are social animals, we form a variety of relationships, and we often band together into larger groups to offer one another the protection and strength of numbers and to pool our talents to help one another. Our ancestors employed this interpersonal communication function for survival. In fact, psychologist and cognitive neuroscientist Merlin Donald (1991) argued that Homo erectus was a unique species because they were the first hunter-gatherers and were no longer living in isolation from one another. Their society, even in the absence of language, was one “where cooperation and social coordination of action were central to the species survival strategy” (Donald, 1991, pp. 149–150).

Today, our relationships might seem as if they are no longer about “survival,” but they remain fundamentally tied to our mental and physical health. For example, you probably have a variety of relationships and group memberships that you believe are central to who you are, including the relationships with your family of origin and the family and friendships that you form as an adult. Interpersonal communication is an integral component of building and maintaining these relationships; quite simply, a close relationship cannot begin or continue to exist without interpersonal communication. Interpersonal communication helps us meet needs for belonging, for acceptance, and even for self-actualization, and it enables us to share values and principles, which are the foundation of human society.

Interpersonal Communication Barriers

Along with these four interpersonal communication goals come a number of barriers that serve as impediments to the creation of shared meaning between the two communicators. Interpersonal communication barriers differ from noise in that noise is almost always present and is not always problematic—it is merely an interference that needs to be identified and acknowledged. In contrast, interpersonal communication barriers always present challenges when interacting with others.

Misperceptions

The most frequent and broadest barrier of interpersonal communication is misperception. As this chapter has illustrated, there are many factors that can cause misperceptions. For example, the receiver may not decode the message the way the sender intended. Kim and Pat’s interaction clearly illustrates this misperception: Kim believed Pat was ignoring her when he did not respond to her text right away, but Pat was merely driving and unable to reply. As a result of this misperception, conflict occurs. Certainly, a conflict about what to do for dinner is not likely to end Kim and Pat’s relationship, but if the couple continually experience similar misperceptions in their interactions, it is likely that their relationship will suffer and possibly even come to an end.

Misperceptions can also have serious consequences in medical interactions. One study found that primary care physicians (PCPs) who took more time to educate their patients about what to expect during the appointment, encouraged patients’ opinions, and checked to make sure that the patients understood what they said were less often named in malpractice claims than physicians who did not strive to reduce misperceptions in these ways (Levinson, Roter, Mullooly, Dull, & Frankel, 1997). Those PCPs without malpractice claims engaged in active listening and used facilitative comments such as “Go on, tell me more about that,” giving their patients more opportunity to share information and ask questions, thus increasing shared meaning and decreasing patient–provider misperceptions (Levinson et al., 1997).

Long-Distance Relationships

Technological and transportation advances now enable us to live almost anywhere, and we are also more likely to move multiple times to different homes, cities, and even countries during our lives (Zechner, 2008). One side effect of this increased mobility is the growth of long-distance relationships (LDRs), where “communication opportunities are restricted (in the view of the individuals involved) because of geographic parameters and the individuals within the relationship have expectations of a continued close connection” (Stafford, 2005, p. 7). LDRs can take many forms, including romantic, friendship, or familial, and individuals can play a variety of roles in these LDRs, such as providing social support, resources, and care (Bevan & Sparks, 2011). As you read about the LDR barriers below, think about an LDR that you are currently involved in: How do you overcome these barriers to successfully maintain this relationship?

According to Erin Sahlstein (2006), a communication scholar and expert in the study of LDRs, although LDRs have similarities with geographically close relationships, individuals in long-distance relationships may encounter the following specific barriers due to a greater disconnectedness in space and time, which can affect the partners’ ability to maintain their relationships:

· unforeseen time, cost, and convenience issues

· tension and stress management issues

· belated information sharing

· limited opportunities to provide comfort, reassurance, and support

· fewer interactions, in terms of both quantity and quality

· difficulties assisting with individual and relationship crises

There are a number of ways that LDR partners work to overcome these barriers, according to Sahlstein’s (2004) research: They recognize there are both positive and negative aspects associated with each of these interdependent relational states and they feel appreciation for each other and relationship rejuvenation and renewal when they do reunite. Ever-evolving technologies such as video-chatting services and transportation options that increase the likelihood of being in an LDR also provide options for distant partners to overcome barriers and connect and reconnect. We will take another look at LDRs in Chapter 8.

A grandfather, his son, and his grandson having a conversation at home.

David Sacks/Photodisc/Thinkstock

Intergenerational communication occurs when communicators in an interaction are members of different generations.

Increase in Intergenerational Relationships

Mary Lee Hummert (2012) proposes that “age is one of the most salient, and perhaps automatic, ways of categorizing ourselves as well as others” (p. 223). This is especially the case in intergenerational interactions, which occur when members of different generations communicate with one another. Members of a particular generation, such as baby boomers or Generation Z, experience similar social trends, historical events, political and social occurrences, and technological advances that shape their individual perspectives and views about the world (Myers & Davis, 2012). Members of different generations who interact with one another are likely to approach the same situation or event in different ways, creating an intergenerational communication barrier (Myers & Davis, 2012). Hummert (2012) presents the following three associations between life stage or age and communication that may also prompt intergenerational communication barriers:

· Developmental stages of particular age groups can affect how members prefer to communicate and influence their actual communication practices. For example, younger individuals prefer to use smartphones and social media much more than individuals who are 65 and older (Anderson & Perrin, 2017), creating a channel preference barrier between generations that may make it more difficult to initiate and maintain an interaction.

· Age groups or generations are often characterized by differences in economic resources and status, meaning that different generations often have more or less power, influence, and money, and more or less debt than others, resulting in intergenerational conflict. The current phenomenon called the “sandwich generation,” where adult children are taking care of both their younger offspring and their aging parents financially and as informal health caregivers, is an example of one such predicament that can cause intergenerational communication barriers.

· Age-related beliefs or stereotypes can negatively influence if and how members of different generations interact with one another. For example, Gen Z individuals use different words such as “yeet” and view moving back into their family home as a necessary step toward debt reduction, whereas their parents may not understand their language and might view their children returning home as lazy or a sign of failure. These barriers may then impede shared meaning between these two age groups.

Increased life expectancy, advances in medical testing and treatment options, and even the growing use of social media applications such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram all increase the probability that we will communicate with someone from a different generation.

Emerging studies also reveal that online intergenerational interactions can create constructive connections. Researchers have found that having a parent on Facebook actually decreased parent–child conflict for college students (Kanter, Afifi, & Robbins, 2012). Overall, intergenerational communication can also be warm and respectful (Hummert, 2012). Whether the interactions are positive or negative, such communication experiences can certainly provide new and different insights about the world around us and underscore the importance of acknowledging multiple communication viewpoints.

Benefits of Studying Interpersonal Communication

Though we are born with an innate ability to communicate, humans still have much to learn about communication, and everyone can benefit from systematically studying interpersonal communication. What are some specific benefits of an increased understanding of communication between two people? Let’s discuss some specific benefits of studying interpersonal communication.

Understanding the Difficulty in Forming and Maintaining Interpersonal Relationships

A better understanding of interpersonal communication can improve how we relate to others in interpersonal relationships. Though it seems logical and natural for us to form and maintain interpersonal relationships, many of us have trouble doing both. For example, Americans reported having one-third fewer confidants (that is, someone they could have an “important discussion with”) in 2011 than in 1985; this is a decrease from approximately three to two confidants (Brashears, 2011). In addition, even though we are surrounded by others every day (via both mediated and face-to-face channels), many individuals experience chronic loneliness, which is defined as an ongoing, bothersome experience that occurs when an individual’s social network is viewed as somehow deficient; in other words, a person has fewer relationships than she desires (Peplau & Perlman, 1982; Perlman & Peplau, 1981). In a recent survey conducted by Cigna and Ipsos (2018), at least a third of American adults experienced feelings linked to loneliness. Further, Generation Z individuals (born between the late 1990s and early 2000s) were the loneliest generation, with loneliness decreasing as individuals age (Cigna & Ipsos, 2018). A 2017 report from the Jo Cox Foundation found that nine million people in Britain were often or always lonely, which prompted former Prime Minister Theresa May to appoint a minister of loneliness. On October 15, 2018, the first position paper on the country’s loneliness strategy was published; it included practical suggestions such as physicians having the ability to “socially prescribe” participation in community activities and having postal workers identify and check on isolated individuals on their routes (U.K. Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, 2018). These findings suggest that individuals have fewer people they can depend on and that many adults consistently struggle with loneliness.

Individuals have similar difficulties maintaining their relationships. The U.S. divorce rate, which is one of the highest of all industrialized nations, is a major indicator of this struggle (Mullins, Brackett, McKenzie, & Djamba, 2012). According to the National Center for Health Statistics (Goodwin, Mosher, & Chandra, 2010), 35% of first marriages will end in separation or divorce within 10 years. Paul Amato (2010) notes that 43–46% of all U.S. marriages were predicted to end in divorce at the conclusion of the 20th century. An emerging trend since the mid-1990s is the notable jump in divorces among older age groups, also referred to as gray divorces (Kreider & Ellis, 2011). Americans age 50 and over were twice as likely to divorce in 2017 as they were in the 1990s (Stepler, 2017). Nearly all the interpersonal predictors of divorce in Amato’s (2010) review of divorce research reflect difficulty with interpersonal communication between spouses. Such difficulties include

· domestic violence behaviors,

· acts of infidelity,

· the frequency of conflict, and

· the perception that there are numerous relational issues between the spouses.

Many of the recent gray divorces are remarriages (Stepler, 2017), which researchers note are often burdened by communication issues related to stepchildren relationships, money and wills, and healthcare issues and decisions (Brown & Lin, 2012).

Researchers can also identify the impact of interpersonal communication on relationship maintenance if they can define the specific reasons couples enter marital therapy. For example, one study found that problematic communication was the most frequent reason spouses reported entering couples’ therapy (Doss, Simpson, & Christensen, 2004). Another study found that marital therapists ranked communication as the third most significant problem area for the couples that they see in therapy (Whisman, Dixon, & Johnson, 1997). These findings emphasize not only the complexity of maintaining relationships, but also serve as important justifications for further studies about the role of interpersonal communication in relationships. We will return to many of these issues—including relationship maintenance, infidelity, conflict, and relationship deterioration and termination—later in the text.

Understanding Links to Physical and Mental Health

Interpersonal communication—both constructive and destructive—is also related to physical and mental health. Constructive communication involves positive, beneficial messages such as showing that you are supportive, listening to your partner, and being open and willing to share your thoughts and feelings. Destructive communication is comprised of negative and harmful messages that include hostility, insults, and shouting or yelling. For example, greater levels of communication apprehension and topic avoidance during discussions with a close relational partner are examples of destructive communication and are related to greater severity of irritable bowel syndrome symptoms (Bevan, 2009).

The greatest amount of research on destructive communication and health, however, focuses on behaviors during conflicts. Specifically, across studies, the use of competitive or hostile messages in interpersonal conflicts is consistently linked to compromised functions in the cardiovascular, endocrine, and immune systems (Canary & Lakey, 2012; Robles & Kiecolt-Glaser, 2003). This relationship between hostile messages and health also includes nonverbal communication. For example, husbands’ negative facial expressions during conflicts are associated with wives’ physical illness symptoms (Gottman, Levenson, & Woodin, 2001). But conflict avoidance can also be harmful. A 17-year study of 192 married couples considered the effects of different conflict management styles and found that when both spouses suppressed their anger, mortality was twice as likely than when one or both spouses expressed their anger to one another (Harburg, Kaciroti, Gleiberman, Julius, & Schork, 2008).

In contrast, two constructive messages that are beneficial to one’s health are affectionate behaviors and social support. Kory Floyd (2002, in press) tested his affection exchange theory and consistently found that giving and receiving affectionate messages is an important method for reducing individuals’ physiological stress. In addition, a statistical review of 81 studies on social support and health found that the presence of social support in one’s life contributed to increased cardiovascular, endocrine, and immune system functioning (Uchino, Cacioppo, & Kiecolt-Glaser, 1996). Social support also increases the likelihood that patients will adhere to their prescribed medical treatment regimens (DiMatteo, 2004). Overall, a study that examined patterns of findings in previous research (called a meta-analysis) determined that those with adequate interpersonal relationships have a 50% higher likelihood of survival compared to those whose relationships are poor (Holt-Lunstad, Smith, & Layton, 2010). This interpersonal relationship effect is as significant as quitting smoking and has more of an impact than other risk factors such as lack of exercise and obesity (Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010). A more recent meta-analysis that included over 72,000 participants spanning 11 countries also found that increased marital quality was linked to better physical health and greater psychological well-being (Robles, Slatcher, Trombello, & McGinn, 2014).

These are just a few of the hundreds of studies that found a significant link between communication and health. There are numerous ways that communication and relationship quality are associated with health, and the potential physiological benefits of interpersonal communication further emphasize the importance of continued study (see the Web Field Trip feature for more on the importance of interpersonal communication to mental health).

Web Field Trip

Understanding the Constant Evolution of Interpersonal Communication

Our methods of communication rapidly and constantly change, now more than ever before. Interpersonal communication was once limited to face-to-face or written formats such as letters, which often took weeks or months to arrive at their destination. The invention and adoption of the telegraph in the mid-1800s first allowed individuals to efficiently communicate over great distances. But it is only in the last 30 years that how we communicate with one another has substantially shifted and expanded. This shift started with the widespread adoption of the Internet and e-mail, ramped up with the proliferation of smartphones, text messaging, and the development of social media, and continues today with the expansion of videoconferencing services. With one click, tap, or swipe, we can friend, unfollow, or tweet at an individual online and alter our interpersonal relationships. But the increased incidence of cyberbullying also reveals the dark side of such online interactions.

Researchers have accordingly responded to these rapid changes in communication. In just the five years between 2014 and 2019, there has been an explosion in the number of studies that examine how smartphones and social media impact how we relate to one another. For example, U.S. teens now have multiple forms of communication at their disposal when interacting with friends, including face-to-face, mobile, social media, and video-gaming technologies (Lenhart, Smith, Anderson, Duggan, & Perrin, 2015). However, text messaging remains dominant: Its usage by teens increased from 51% in 2006 to 88% in 2015 (Lenhart et al., 2015). In addition, though romantic partners use phones significantly more than any other form of mediated communication to interact with each other, use of text messaging most strongly influences couples’ communication and their satisfaction with their relationship (Coyne, Stockdale, Busby, Iverson, & Grant, 2011). To fully understand the nature of interpersonal communication, we must consider its continual evolution. Each chapter in this text includes the feature IPC in the Digital Age, which highlights specific research into the interesting new ways that we can relate to each other.

IPC in the Digital Age

Pg. 6

1.4 How This Book Will Help You Communicate More Competently

The field of interpersonal communication encompasses a large body of information. The primary goals of this text are to increase your awareness of the principles of effective interpersonal communication and to enable you to appropriately and effectively apply these principles in your everyday interactions. Remember that communication is a process, which means that your goals might change over the course of an interaction or that a new goal might become more important. Interpersonal communication is a lifelong study that requires ongoing practice for everyone. The notion of being both appropriate and effective in your interactions with others is called communication competence, and we will return to this term throughout the text to illustrate its utility in a variety of communication situations.

Competent sometimes has a connotation of “good enough” or “passable.” However, as it relates to interpersonal communication, competence is what we think of when we envision the qualities of a skilled communicator (Spitzberg, 2000; Spitzberg & Cupach, 2011). Communication researchers Brian Spitzberg and William Cupach introduced the concept of communication competence nearly 35 years ago, and their definition that includes the essential aspects of communication competence is our focus here. Though Spitzberg and Cupach (2011) believe that being interpersonally skilled is essential for developing interpersonal relationships, they also estimate that 7% to 25% of adults are not interpersonally competent. Yet, with some guidance, such as what is offered in this text, communication competence is an important interpersonal skill that many individuals can improve.

Effectiveness and appropriateness are both essential parts of communication competence—we need to be both effective and appropriate to be communicatively competent. However, these two parts can conflict with one another, and learning to successfully balance them can be a challenge. The following sections elaborate on both aspects that define communication competence, describe three factors that can improve your communication competence, and introduce a test that you can complete to determine your current level of communication competence.

Communication Effectiveness

The first aspect of being a competent communicator is being effective. Being an effective communicator means, quite simply, achieving your goals. Effectiveness refers to how well you are able to get what you want from an interaction. This can be as simple as achieving shared meaning with another person when the message you encode is decoded in a similar manner. Effectiveness can also involve specific goals, or intentions, that you bring to and take part in during an interaction. For example, you might make an appointment with your boss to ask for a raise, and, in this case, you would not classify the communication as effective simply because you and your boss both understand what the meeting is about. Instead, you would feel that the interaction is effective only if your boss increases your salary.

Though being an effective communicator seems simple, it becomes more complicated when you acknowledge that there are two communicators with separate but interdependent communication goals. In other words, is it possible for both individuals to be effective communicators and to achieve multiple outcomes they both seek? The answer to this question depends on a number of factors. Consider again the meeting you scheduled with your boss. If the communicators’ goals conflict—you seek a raise but your boss’s goal is to not agree to one—then it is difficult to achieve mutual communication effectiveness. However, if you and your boss compromise, each giving up something to reach an agreement that works for both of you, then you and your boss will likely leave the interaction feeling as if you at least somewhat accomplished your goals. However, if both communicators have similar goals—you and your boss both want you to get a raise—it is much easier for everyone to feel as if they are effective. Further, it is possible to still feel you are effective even if you do not achieve all of your initial goals. As we noted earlier in this chapter, communication is a process, so your goals are likely to shift during an interaction. Thus, if your boss responds to your request for a raise by telling you that the company is in trouble and that they are struggling just to keep you on as an employee, your goal will likely switch from seeking more money to making a strong case to keep your job.

Two professionals shaking hands at a conference table.

Klaus Vedfelt/Iconica/Getty Images

Social norms can help you determine what is appropriate in a specific communication interaction. In American culture, for example, shaking hands with a new acquaintance is a customary behavior in professional contexts.

Communication Appropriateness

Communication competence is also inherently defined by appropriateness, or the consideration of the rules, norms, and expectations of others in an interaction. For example, communicators are appropriate when they learn and follow rules—which are directions indicating the obligated, preferred, and prohibited behaviors in certain contexts and situations—during an interaction (Shimanoff, 1980). These rules take into account the broader context of the interaction, and the context of the interaction assists in determining which appropriateness standards are to be met (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2011).

Some rules are established by a society or culture in the form of social norms. For example, in U.S. culture, it is a customary social norm to shake hands when you first meet someone in a professional setting. Rules or norms can also be unique to a relationship; for instance, one might follow the rules of monogamy when in an exclusive relationship with a romantic partner. Some rules can even be specific to an individual. For example, a professor might ask students to refrain from using laptops or tablets during class. Such rules and expectations are often implicit, meaning that they are not directly and clearly stated, yet we are aware of them. In fact, we are often most mindful and conscious of rules and expectations when they are broken.

As noted above, sometimes it is difficult to balance effectiveness and appropriateness during an interaction, but both are necessary elements of communication competence. The ability to be both effective and appropriate takes practice. You might get what you want if you are effective but not appropriate, yet doing so will likely upset, hurt, or damage your relationship with the other person. Conversely, if you follow the rules and act the way you are expected to—if you are appropriate but not effective—you might not get what you want. However, communicators who make an effort to get along and treat others with respect are more likely to achieve their goals.

Factors That Facilitate Communication Competence

How can we become competent communicators? According to Spitzberg and Cupach’s (1984) model of communication competence, which goes beyond their definition to help us increase our competence, there are three things that can assist us in being more competent: (1) knowledge, (2) motivation, and (3) skill.

Knowledge is the necessary awareness of which behaviors or messages are effective or appropriate in a particular situation. This knowledge can be about content, such as the topic of the conversation or information about the other communicator. For example, you might have knowledge about someone’s food or movie preferences. But knowledge can also be about procedure, such as how an interaction should or could proceed. For example, you might know how to best solve a problem or predict someone’s reaction to a message. Both content and procedural knowledge can improve communication competence.

The second factor that facilitates an individual’s communication competence is motivation, which Spitzberg and Cupach (2011) define as a force that energizes and guides us to approach or avoid in a social situation. In other words, we have to actually want to be effective and appropriate in order to be competent. We may have the knowledge that we need to be competent, but choose to not use it. Conflict is an example of an interpersonal situation where communicators often are not motivated to be competent. If you are engaged in a conflict with a close relational partner, you might get so upset and frustrated by the topic and the messages exchanged that you intentionally decide to insult your partner, punch a hole in a wall, or storm out—all of which display limited communication competence.

Finally, skill is a factor that facilitates competence. Skill is the ability to demonstrate the behaviors deemed most competent in a particular situation or context. Skill is dependent on knowledge and motivation; we must possess both before we can develop skill. However, even if we are knowledgeable and motivated, there is no guarantee we will be skilled in an interaction. For example, you might know how to behave and be motivated to act accordingly in a specific situation, but perhaps you still perform poorly. This type of response can happen in a job interview, a public speaking situation, and even a first date.

Complete the communication competence scale provided in the following Self-Test feature. Communication competence is an important interpersonal skill, and it requires awareness of our individual communication patterns. Try to be honest with yourself as you complete the scale, or even ask a friend, family member, or romantic partner to complete it on your behalf. Then evaluate your results and reflect on areas you could improve. The next sections discuss techniques for improving your intrapersonal communication and developing your communication competence.

Self-Assessment

Interpersonal Communication Competence

The following self-test is based on Spitzberg and Cupach's model of communication competence (1984). Answer each item honestly as it currently applies to you in typical conversations with others. There are a total of 18 statements for you to review.

1. I act in ways that meet situational demands for appropriateness.