APA Paper 400 Words on Interpersonal Communications

Interpersonal-Communication-Building-Connections-Together-1st-Edition.pdf

Home >English homework help >APA Paper 400 Words on Interpersonal Communications

.......

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: Building Connections Together puts students in the center of interpersonal communication by …

ACTIVELY engaging students by appealing to their interests in popular culture, media, and technology. SHOWING students how online connections affect the media generation and the dynamics of the interpersonal experience. PROVIDING abundant opportunities for students to actively apply and practice what they are learning. EXPLORING how gender and culture influence interaction. SHEDDING NEW LIGHT on the everyday interactions and relationships of students.

This text uses an applied approach and an interactive style to engage students. Every chapter considers how media and technology affect the dynamics of relationships and self-expression. The authors also focus on diversity and developing cultural understanding through explorations in every chapter of how gender and culture help shape experiences of interpersonal communication.

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: Building Connections Together puts students in the center of interpersonal communication through abundant interactive pedagogical features throughout the text, including:

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know?

“I liked how it had a true/false section in the beginning of the chapter so you can see what you know before you even read the chapter.”

—Margaret Rountree, Student Old Dominion University

“The ‘What Do You Know’ sections are excellent because they provide a framework for students to read the chapter. It helps them determine what is most important.”

—Todd Lee Goen, Professor Christopher Newport University

Try This

“My favorite feature is ‘Try This.’” —Wayne Thomas, Student

Old Dominion University

“I really like the ‘Try This’ because it provides instant ability for students to put into action what they are reading about in the text. Application is often the best way to learn so this is an awesome addition.”

—Christa Tess Kalk, Professor Minneapolis Community & Technical College

“The ‘Try This’ sections really seemed to spark some good discussion in the class. This allowed students to see their communication as effective or ineffective, appropriate or inappropriate, and allowed them to look inward. It gave them a chance to reflect on how/why they experience difficulties in relationships and how they can better approach conflict.”

— Lee Lavery, Professor Ivy Tech Community College

.......INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: Building Connections Together puts students in the center of interpersonal communication through abundant interactive pedagogical features throughout the text, including:

Analyze This

ANALYZE THIS: Edward de Bono

Edward de Bono is a physician and leading authority on creative thinking. What does the following excerpt from de Bono’s I Am Right—You Are Wrong suggest about how the Japanese handle conflict?

Every day the leading executives in the Japanese motor industry meet for lunch in their special club. They discuss problems common to the whole motor industry. But a soon as lunch is over and they step over the threshold of the club, out into the street, they are bitter enemies seeking to kill each other’s business by marketing, technical changes, pricing policy, etc. For the Japanese, who do not have the tradition of Western logic, there is no contradiction at all between “friend” and “enemy.” They find it easy to conceive of someone as a friend–enemy or enemy–friend.

SOURCE: Edward de Bono, I Am Right—You Are Wrong, New York: Viking, 1991, p. 196.

Reflect on This

“…so many opportunities to really engage learning throughout the chapter with reflection questions, application ideas, etc. Excellent!”

—Christa Tess Kalk, Professor Minneapolis Community & Technical College

REFLECT ON THIS: The Cell Effect

Researcher Noelle Chesley wanted to find out if the time people spent on cell-phones enhanced or detracted from their overall feelings of happiness. To answer the question, Chesley surveyed more than

1,200 adults, concluding that a correlation existed: the more time individuals spent on cell-phones the less happy and less satisfied they became with their family relationships. Chesley attributed this, at least in part, to the work lives of people spilling over into their personal lives and causing stress at home.

Consider these questions:

1. Do your experiences confirm Chesley’s findings? Does time spent on your cell stress the relationships you share with people important to you, perhaps because you divide your attention, with less attention being paid to the person(s) with you?

2. Do you think Chesley would have found the same results if she had studied the time we spend on tablets or computers? Explain your answer.

3. What recommendations can you offer for alleviating such relationship stressors? For example, would you expect others to abide by rules specifying when to use cell phones or other digital tools?

Source: Noelle Chesley, “Blurring Boundaries? Linking Technology Use, Spillover, Individual Distress, and Family Satisfaction.” Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 2005, p. 1237–1238.

and with even more pedagogy like: • Sections in every chapter which focus on Gender, Culture,

Media, and Technology • Connect the Case feature ends chapter with a case study for

further application • SAGE Original Interpersonal Communication Scenario Videos • Review This section at the end of each chapter including a

• Chapter Summary • Chapter Review • Check Your Understanding • Check Your Skills • Key Terms • SAGE Student Study Site Details

FREE AND OPEN-ACCESS STUDENT SITE

“SAGE’s free and open-access site will be the biggest draw for all of those tools since many online accompanying tools usually cost students quite a bit extra. The flashcards and study questions would draw my personal interest the most.”

—Lyndsi Earle, Student Old Dominion University

SAGE provides comprehensive and free online resources at sagepub.com.gambleic designed to support and enhance both instructors’ and students’ experiences.

Students maximize their understanding of introduction to interpersonal communication through the free, open-access Student Study Site.

STUDENT RESOURCES INCLUDE:

• SAGE Journal Articles

• SAGE Original Videos

• Web resources

• eFlashcards

• Web quizzes

• Study questions

• Social media guidelines

• Video resources

• Self-assessment quizzes

PASSWORD-PROTECTED INSTRUCTOR TEACHING SITE

Strikes a never-before-seen balance between general education goals AND preparation for Communication majors (links to journal articles in Communication are a major plus).”

—Kathleen Glenister Roberts, Professor

Duquesne University

SAGE provides comprehensive and free online resources at sagepub.com.gambleic designed to support and enhance both instructors’ and students’ experiences.

Instructors benefit from access to the password-protected Instructor Teaching Site.

INSTRUCTOR RESOURCES INCLUDE:

• Test bank

• PowerPoint slides

• Sample syllabi

• Class assignments

• Video resources

• Web resources

• SAGE WATCH THIS scenario videos and video links

• SAGE Journal Articles with articles for every chapter (includes information on how to read and critique a journal article)

• Social media guidelines

.......INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: Building Connections Together puts students in the center of interpersonal communication by asking them what they think of our text. Here is what they are saying:

WRITING STYLE AND RELATABILITY

“The writing was really easy to comprehend. I really like all the self- assessments. After taking all the self-assessments I could learn a little bit more about myself.”

—Juliana Pires, Student Old Dominion University

“The text is user-friendly, seems to be geared toward an introductory student level, and offers real-life examples that promote understanding/application.”

—Lee Lavery, Professor Ivy Tech Community College

“My favorite chapter was the constructive communication behaviors, and it has helped me by teaching me about the role reversal technique, which I didn’t know about before—it will allow me to see the other person’s side more clearly.”

—Gabriel Lopez, Student Old Dominion University

ACTIVITIES, ASSESSMENTS, AND FEATURES

“I really liked the GUIDELINES FOR RESOLVING CONFLICT because having the proper knowledge to resolve conflicts can help us to improve our interpersonal skills and communicate better with people, avoiding problems.”

—Rosario Villagra, Student Old Dominion University

“The activities give a better idea of a complex subject. The way the information is written and laid out is simple to understand and involves the reader more. I liked how it had a true/false section in the beginning of the chapter so you can see what you know before you even read the chapter.”

—Margaret Rountree, Student Old Dominion University

“The nonverbal chapter is the best I’ve seen.” —Todd Lee Goen, Professor

Christopher Newport University

OVERALL TEXTBOOK EXPERIENCE

“…relatable stories and examples, as well as fun learning activities.” —Amanda Osborn, Student

Old Dominion University

“…interesting, easily understood, and I liked the fact that current pop culture examples were mentioned.”

—Stacy Evans, Student Ohlone College

.......INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: Building Connections Together puts students in the center of interpersonal communication by offering them a lower-priced option

SAGE VALUE PRICE

“Of course as a college student I think the SAGE value price is great!” —Melissa Temple, Student

Old Dominion University

“Price is always a concern for students. As educators, we need to make certain our students are getting the best materials possible at a reasonable price.”

—Lee Lavery, Professor Ivy Tech Community College

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

........... Building Connections Together ...........

TERI KWAL GAMBLE

COLLEGE OF NEW ROCHELLE

& MICHAEL W. GAMBLE

NEW YORK INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

FOR INFORMATION:

SAGE Publications, Inc. 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, California 91320 E-mail: [email protected]

SAGE Publications Ltd. 1 Oliver’s Yard 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP United Kingdom

SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd. B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044 India

SAGE Publications Asia-Pacifc Pte. Ltd. 3 Church Street #10 -04 Samsung Hub Singapore 049483

Acquisitions Editor: Matthew Byrnie

Associate Editor: Nathan Davidson

Editorial Assistant: Stephanie Palermini

Production Editor: Astrid Virding/Eric Garner

Copy Editor: Judy Selhorst

Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.

Proofreader: Wendy Jo Dymond

Indexer: Rick Hurd

Cover Designer: Scott Van Atta

Marketing Manager: Liz Thornton

Permissions Editor: Karen Ehrmann

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Gamble, Teri Kwal.

Interpersonal communication : building connections together / Teri Kwal Gamble, College of New Rochelle, Michael W. Gamble, New York Institute of Technology.

pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978–2-4522–2-0 (pbk.)

1. Interpersonal communication. 2. Communication—Psychological aspects. I. Gamble, Michael, 1943- II. Title.

HM1166.G36 2013 302—dc23 2012046294

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

13 14 15 16 17 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Brief Contents

PREFACE

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

PART I FOUNDATIONS

CHAPTER 1 INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: A First Look CHAPTER 2 THE IMPACT OF SELF-CONCEPT CHAPTER 3 PERCEPTION

PART II MESSAGES

CHAPTER 4 LISTENING CHAPTER 5 COMMUNICATING WITH WORDS CHAPTER 6 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION CHAPTER 7 CONVERSATIONS

PART III DYNAMICS

CHAPTER 8 EMOTIONS CHAPTER 9 TRUST AND DECEPTION

CHAPTER 10 POWER AND INFLUENCE CHAPTER 11 CONFLICT

PART IV RELATIONSHIPS IN CONTEXT

CHAPTER 12 RELATIONSHIP DYNAMICS CHAPTER 13 INTIMACY AND DISTANCE IN RELATIONSHIPS CHAPTER 14 RELATIONSHIPS IN OUR LIVES: Family, Work, and

Health-Related Contexts

GLOSSARY

NOTES

PHOTO CREDITS

INDEX

Detailed Contents

PREFACE

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

PART 1: FOUNDATIONS

CHAPTER 1. INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: A FIRST LOOK

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? What Is Interpersonal Communication?

Interpersonal Communication Is about Relationships Interpersonal Communication Takes Two Interpersonal Communication Is a Lifelong Project

TRY THIS: Today, Who Is a Stranger? Models of Interpersonal Communication

ANALYZE THIS: Are You in a Disguise? People

TRY THIS: Rating Relationships Messages Channels

Noise Feedback Context Effect Visualizing Communication

How Does Interpersonal Communication Enhance Our Lives? It Fulfills Psychological Functions

TRY THIS: Making Model Sense It Fulfills Social Functions It Fulfills Information Functions It Fulfills Influence Functions

TRY THIS: Functions in Action Understanding Interpersonal Contact: Characteristics, Patterns, and Axioms

of Communication Five Characteristics of Interpersonal Communication

Interpersonal Communication Is a Dynamic Process Interpersonal Communication Is Unrepeatable Interpersonal Communication Is Irreversible Interpersonal Communication Is Learned Interpersonal Communication Is Characterized by Wholeness and

Nonsummativity Interpersonal Patterns Five Communication Axioms

Axiom 1: You Cannot Not Communicate Axiom 2: Every Interaction Has Content and Relationship Dimensions Axiom 3: Every Interaction Is Defined by How It Is Punctuated Axiom 4: Messages Consist of Verbal Symbols and Nonverbal Cues Axiom 5: Interactions Are Either Symmetrical or Complementary

The Impact of Diversity and Culture Diversity and Communication Style Orientation and Cultural Context

Individual and Collective Orientation High-Context and Low-Context Communication

The Impact of Gender Gender and Communication Style

The Impact of Media and Technology

TRY THIS: What’s Okay with You? On the Way to Gaining Communication Competence

Add to Your Storehouse of Knowledge about Interpersonal Communication

Recognize How Your Relationships Affect You Analyze Your Options Interact Ethically, Respect Diversity, and Think Critically about Your

Person-to-Person Contacts

REFLECT ON THIS: The Cell Effect Practice and Apply Skills to Improve Interpersonal Performance

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Sylvia and Khalil Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 2. THE IMPACT OF SELF-CONCEPT

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? The Self-Concept: Your Answer to Who You Are

ANALYZE THIS: The Clown TRY THIS: Who Are You? How Are the Self and Self-Concept Related?

How Accurate Is the Self-Concept? Self-Esteem: Assessing Self-Worth

High versus Low Self-Esteem

Self-Esteem and Performance How Others Shape Our Self-Concept

We Reflect Others’ Appraisals

TRY THIS: Feelings about Age and Physical Ability We Compare Ourselves with Others We Have Perceived, Ideal, and Expected Selves

Goffman’s Dramaturgical Approach Imagining a Future Self

TRY THIS: The “Authentic” Self Reactions to You: Confirming, Rejecting, and Disconfirming Responses

The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: The Influence of Positive and Negative Pygmalions

TRY THIS: Ups and Downs Revising Your Self-Concept: Reexamining Impressions and Conceptions

Diversity and Culture in Relationships: How Important Is the “I”? The Self in Individualistic and Collectivistic Cultures

REFLECT ON THIS: Changes The Self in High- and Low-Context Cultures The Self in High- and Low-Power-Distance Cultures

TRY THIS: Are You an “I” or Part of a “We”? Attitudes toward the Self across Cultures

Gender and Self-Concept

TRY THIS: Young and Old Seeing the Self through the Media and Technology Looking Glass

REFLECT ON THIS: Beauty Standards and Dying to Be Thin The Impact of the Media The Impact of Technology

ANALYZE THIS: MEdia Gaining Communication Competence: Ways to Strengthen Your Self-Concept

Update Pictures Take Lots and Lots of Pictures Explore Others’ Pictures of You

Picture Possibilities

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Aisha’s Term Paper Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 3. PERCEPTION

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? Our Perception Defines Our Reality

Do We See the Same Realty? Perception in Action: The Process at Work

Selection Organization Evaluation and Interpretation Memory Response

ANALYZE THIS: The Deceptiveness of Appearance Frameworks of Perception

Schemata Perceptual Sets and Selectivities

REFLECT ON THIS: Attribution Theory

TRY THIS: Lessons Learned Ethnocentrism and Stereotypes

Barriers to Accurate Perception

REFLECT ON THIS: Stereotypes Age and Person Perception

TRY THIS: The Appearance Factor Fact-Inference Confusions

TRY THIS: Can You Tell the Difference? Allness Indiscrimination

ANALYZE THIS: Is That All There Is? Frozen Evaluations and Snap Judgments Blindering Judging Others More Harshly than Ourselves

Diversity and Culture: Interpreting through Different I’s

Gender and Perception

The Media, Technology, and Perception The Media and Perception Technology and Perception

Gaining Communication Competence: Enhancing Your Perceptual Abilities Recognize the Part You Play Be a Patient Perceiver

TRY THIS: Facebook in Focus Become a Perception Checker Widen Your Perception See through the Eyes of Another Build Perceptual Bridges, Not Walls Consider How Technology Is Changing How We Perceive

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Dax’s Trial Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

PART II: MESSAGES

CHAPTER 4. LISTENING

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? Listening in Your Life

Differences between Hearing and Listening

The Differences between Effective and Ineffective Listeners

ANALYZE THIS: Understanding “Understanding” Stages of Listening

TRY THIS: How’s Your LQ (Listening Quotient)? Stage 1: Hearing Stage 2: Understanding Stage 3: Remembering Stage 4: Interpreting Stage 5: Evaluating Stage 6: Responding

Styles and Types of Listening Styles of Listening

People-Oriented Listening

REFLECT ON THIS: When Is Listening Not First and Foremost? Action-Oriented Listening Content-Oriented Listening Time-Oriented Listening

Types of Listening Appreciative Listening Comprehensive Listening Critical/Deliberative Listening Empathetic Listening

Listening Ethics Do You Tune Out?

ANALYZE THIS: Active and Inactive Listening Do You Fake Attention? Do You Ignore Specific Individuals? Do You Lose Emotional Control? Do You Avoid Challenging Content? Are you Egocentric? Do You Waste Potential Listening Time? Are You Overly Apprehensive? Are You Suffering Symptoms of Listening Burnout?

Hurdling Listening Roadblocks

Responding with Feedback Defining Feedback Feedback Options

Feedback May Be Immediate or Delayed Feedback May Be Person- or Message-Focused Feedback May Be Low- or High-Monitored Feedback May Be Evaluative or Nonevaluative

Culture’s Influence on Listening

TRY THIS: It’s in the “I”s

TRY THIS: Culture, Communication Style, and Feedback Gender’s Influence on Listening

Media and Technological Influences on Listening Media Influences Technology’s Influences

TRY THIS: The Ethics of Illusionary Listening Gaining Communication Competence: Becoming a Better Listener

Catch Yourself Exhibiting a Bad Habit Substitute a Good Habit for a Bad Habit Listen with Your Whole Body Consistently Use Your Ears, Not Just Your Mouth See the Other Side

Don’t Listen Assumptively Participate Actively

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Nonlistening Flora Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 5. COMMUNICATING WITH WORDS

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? Defining Language

The Meaning of Words The Triangle of Meaning

Removing Semantic Barriers Differentiate Denotative and Connotative Meaning Recognize How Time and Place May Change Meaning

TRY THIS: Measuring Meaning Consider the Effect of Your Words

Euphemisms and Linguistic Ambiguity Recognize Emotive Language

TRY THIS: Euphemisms and Strategic Ambiguity Acknowledge the Power of Polarizing Language Balance Politically Correct Language Beware of Bypassing

REFLECT ON THIS: Which Do You Prefer?

Don’t Be Misled by Labels

TRY THIS: Is It Politically Correct or Incorrect? Language and Relationships: Communication Style, Words, and Feelings

ANALYZE THIS: Hurtful Words Culturespeak

TRY THIS: The Language-Culture Link Genderspeak

Language Can Diminish and Stereotype Women and Men Language Practices Reflect Goals and Feelings about Power

Age and Language

REFLECT ON THIS: The Muted Group Language, Media, and Technology

Experiencing Media

TRY THIS: How Would You Reengineer a Media Image? Experiencing Technology

Gaining Communication Competence: Making Your Words Work Are My Words Clear? Are My Words Appropriate? Am I Using Words That Are Concrete? Do My Words Speak to the Other Person and Reflect the Context? Do I Share “to Me” Meaning? Do I Respect Uniqueness? Do I Look for Growth?

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of the Wounding Words Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 6. NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? Defining Nonverbal Communication

The Functions and Characteristics of Nonverbal Communication The Functions of Nonverbal Cues Characteristics of Nonverbal Communication

All Nonverbal Behavior Has Message Value Nonverbal Communication Is Ambiguous Nonverbal Communication Is Predominantly Relational Nonverbal Behavior May Reveal Deception

TRY THIS: It’s Not Just What You Say ... Reading Nonverbal Messages

Kinesics: The Messages of Movement Face and Eye Talk Putting on a Face: The Ethics of Face-Work

ANALYZE THIS: Facecrime Gestures and Posture: The Body in Motion and at Rest

TRY THIS: The Ethics of Impression Creation Decoding the Body’s Messages

Paralinguistics: The Messages of the Voice Pitch Volume Rate Articulation and Pronunciation

REFLECT ON THIS: Ummmmmmm ... Hesitations and Silence

Proxemics: Space and Distance Talks Spatial Relationships: Near or Far Places and Their Spaces: Decoding the Environment

Territoriality: Yours and Mine Haptics: Touch Artifactual Communication and Appearance Olfactics: Smell Color: Associations and Connections Chronemics: The Communicative Value of Time

Culture and Nonverbal Behavior

REFLECT ON THIS: Does Beauty Pay? Gender and Nonverbal Behavior

TRY THIS: The Race Factor Nonverbal Cues and Flirting: Expressing Interest or Disinterest

TRY THIS: Top Billing Media, Technology, and Nonverbal Messages

TRY THIS: Can You Read the Cues? Gaining Communication Competence in Nonverbal Communication

Pay Attention to Nonverbal Messages When Uncertain about a Nonverbal Cue’s Meaning, Ask! Realize Inconsistent Messages Have Communicative Value Match the Degree of Closeness you Seek with the Nonverbal Behavior

You Display Monitor Your Nonverbal Behavior Acknowledge That Abilities to Encode and Decode Nonverbal

Messages Vary

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Surprised Sam Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 7. CONVERSATIONS

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? The Importance of Conversational Contact

TRY THIS: Do You Like to Talk? What Is Conversation?

TRY THIS: The Elevator Conversation: Games and Players Conversational Structure

TRY THIS: Conversational Analysis The Greeting Topic Priming The Heart of the Conversation Preliminary Processing The Closing

Conversational Management Turn Taking: Maintaining and Yielding the Floor The Cooperation Principle

TRY THIS: Whose Turn Is It, Anyway? The Dialogue Principle

ANALYZE THIS: Relationship Turns Repairing Conversational Damage

Cultural Differences and Conversation

Gender Differences and Conversation

REFLECT ON THIS: Interruptitis Media and Technology Talk

ANALYZE THIS: Don’t Finish My Thoughts

TRY THIS: Squawk Talk Media Talk Technology Talk

Gaining Communication Competence: Improving Your Conversation Skills Develop Metaconversational Abilities Develop Awareness of How Culture and Gender Differences Affect

Conversation Strive to Improve Conversation Initiation, Management, and

Termination Abilities

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of the Company Party Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

PART III: DYNAMICS

CHAPTER 8. EMOTIONS

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? What Are Emotions?

Why Emotional Intelligence Is Important The Look and Feel of Emotions

Surprise! Anger Happiness Sadness

REFLECT ON THIS: Can Exercise Make You Happy and Less Stressed? Fear Disgust Emotions: Primary, Mixed, and Contagious

Emotions Affect Evaluations

TRY THIS: Emotional Checkup Relationships and Emotions

Are Your Emotions Facilitative or Debilitative? What Do You Tell Yourself?

TRY THIS: Do You Have Resilience? What Do You Tell Another Person?

ANALYZE THIS: Should You Tell? What Is Your Emotional Attachment Style?

Culture and the Expression of Emotion

TRY THIS: Are You a Face-Saver? Gender and the Expression of Emotion

Media and Technology: Channeling Feelings Media Models

TRY THIS: Sharing Feelings Technological Channels

TRY THIS: Modeling Gaining Communication Competence: Communicating Emotion

Recognize That Thoughts Cause Feelings Choose the Right Words Show That You Accept Responsibility for Your Feelings Share Feelings Fully Decide When, Where, and to Whom to Reveal Feelings Describe the Response You Seek

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Late Jean Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 9. TRUST AND DECEPTION

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? What Is Trust?

The Bases of Trust The Components of Trust

Trusting Behavior Trustworthy Behavior

TRY THIS: Can I Depend on You? Can You Depend on Me? Failed Trust

Forgiveness: Rebuilding a Relationship after Trust Is Betrayed

ANALYZE THIS: Misplaced Trust Cost-Benefit Theory: The Price We Are Willing to Pay for a Relationship

Defining the Relational Situation

TRY THIS: Relationship Balance Sheet Cooperative and Competitive Relationships

TRY THIS: Cooperative or Competitive? Supportive and Defensive Relationships

Evaluation versus Description Control versus Problem Orientation Strategy versus Spontaneity

ANALYZE THIS: On the Defensive Neutrality versus Empathy Superiority versus Equality Certainty versus Provisionalism

Deception and Relationship Ethics

TRY THIS: Cornered Why Do We Lie?

REFLECT ON THIS: Building Company Trust White Lies: Motivation Matters Lying to Ourselves: Defensive Strategies

Displacement Repression Rationalization

Relational Counterfeiters The Effects of Lying

REFLECT ON THIS: Richard S. Lazarus and the Case for White Lies The Effects of Gossip

Culture and Trust

TRY THIS: How Prepared Are You to Trust? Gender and Trust

Media, Technology, and Lessons on Trust The Media and Trust Technology and Trust

Gaining Communication Competence: Nurturing a Trusting Relationship Be Willing to Disclose Yourself to Another Person Let the Other Person Know You Accept and Support Him or Her Develop a Cooperative/Supportive Rather than a

Competitive/Defensive Orientation Trust Another When Warranted

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of the Trusting Agent Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 10. POWER AND INFLUENCE

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? The Control Factor: Exploring the Balance of Power in Relationships

Feeling Powerful versus Powerless Are You Socially Anxious? Are You on a Power Trip?

Where Does Power Come From? Power Categories

TRY THIS: What’s Your Power Orientation? Reward Power Coercive Power Expert Power Legitimate Power Referent Power Persuasive Power

Exercising Persuasion The Role of Attitudes

What Is an Attitude?

TRY THIS: Powerful People and Power Plays Where Do Our Attitudes Come From?

The Role of Beliefs What Are Beliefs?

TRY THIS: Assessing Attitudes and Surveying Beliefs Defining and Characterizing Values

Gaining Compliance in Interpersonal Relationships Strategies for Compliance Gaining

ANALYZE THIS: The Diary of a Young Girl TRY THIS: Graphing Your Values

Strategies for Balancing Attitudes Routes to Interpersonal Influence

TRY THIS: Tensions and Tactics Diversity, Values, and Relational Power

Gender and the Balance of Power

TRY THIS: Who Has the Power? REFLECT ON THIS: Power Issues by Gender Media, Technology, and Power Shifts

Media Power Technological Power

Gaining Communication Competence: Controlling Relationships Use Power Wisely Understand How Beliefs, Values, and Attitudes Affect Interactions Capitalize on the Need for Balance

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of the Power Moment Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 11. CONFLICT

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? The Meaning of Conflict

Conflict Defined Conflict Is Based on Interaction

Feelings about Conflict Functional Conflict Dysfunctional Conflict

TRY THIS: Thinking through Conflict Conflict’s Sources

Interactions among Individuals Conflict-Generating Behaviors

Preemptive Striking Forcing Blaming

Classifying Conflicts The Nature of the Goal The Intensity Level of the Conflict

TRY THIS: How Verbally Aggressive Are You? The Character of the Conflict

Conflict Management Styles Avoiding Competitive Compromising Accommodative Collaborative

TRY THIS: Where Are You on the Grid? Communication Behavior in the Face of Conflict

Destructive Communication Behaviors Constructive Communication Behaviors DESC Scripts

Describe Express Specify Consequences

Your Expressive Style: Nonassertive, Aggressive, or Assertive

TRY THIS: A Self-Assessment Nonassertiveness

Why We Do Not Assert Ourselves Nonassertive Language

Aggressiveness Why We Act Aggressively Aggressive Language

Assertiveness Learning Assertive Behavior Assertive Language

Culture and Conflict Resolution

ANALYZE THIS: Edward de Bono Gender and Conflict Resolution

Media, Technology, and Conflict Resolution: Models or Madness Media Portrayals: Model the Way

REFLECT ON THIS: Lessons Learned Technology: Real and Unreal

TRY THIS: It’s War! Gaining Communication Competence: Guidelines for Resolving Conflict

Recognize That Conflict Can Be Resolved Rationally Agree about How to Define the Conflict Exchange Perceptions: Describe, Express, Specify, and Note

Behavioral Consequences Assess Alternative Solutions and Choose the One That Seems Best

Implement and Evaluate the Selected Solution

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of the Jousting Roommates Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

PART IV: RELATIONSHIPS IN CONTEXT

CHAPTER 12. RELATIONSHIP DYNAMICS

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? Why Do We Need Relationships?

Relationships Preserve Happiness and Health Relationships Prevent Isolation Relationships Meet Interpersonal Needs

ANALYZE THIS: By Yourself Relationships Serve as Behavioral Anchors Relationships Function as Communication Conduits

TRY THIS: How Do You Feel about Being In /Out, Up/Down, or Close/Far?

When Good, Relationships Help Maintain Our Sense of Worth Relationship Characteristics

Duration Contact Frequency Sharing Support Interaction Variability Goals

Forming Friendships The Nature of Intimacy The Nature of Acquaintanceship

TRY THIS: Measuring Intimacy The Nature of Friendship

Role-Limited Interaction Friendly Relations Moving toward Friendship Nascent Friendship Stabilized Friendship Waning Friendship

Romance: Coming Together and Breaking Apart Love’s Dimensions The Triangle of Love Love’s Stages

Stage 1: Initiating Stage 2: Experimenting Stage 3: Intensifying Stage 4: Integrating Stage 5: Bonding Stage 6: Differentiating Stage 7: Circumscribing

ANALYZE THIS: Status Updates Stage 8: Stagnating Stage 9: Avoiding Stage 10: Terminating

TRY THIS: Looking at Your Relationships Relationship Attractors

Physical Attractiveness Social Attractiveness

REFLECT ON THIS: The Romantic Attraction Factor Task Attractiveness Proximity Reinforcement Similarity Complementarity

TRY THIS: Attractors Culture and Connection

Does the Culture Place More Stress on Individuals or on Social Relationships?

Does the Culture Promote the Development of Short- or Long-Term Relationships?

Does the Culture Value Results or the Interactional Process? Gender and Relationship Formation

Media, Technology, and Social Worlds Media Portrayals of Friendship and Romance

TRY THIS: Ties That Bind Technology: Meeting in Cyberspace

Gaining Communication Competence: Mastering Relationship Complexities Understand That Relationships Don’t Just Happen

Recognize Why We Need Others Understand the Nature of Friendship and Romantic Relationships Meet the Challenges Posed by Media and Technology

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of the Job Promotion Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 13. INTIMACY AND DISTANCE IN RELATIONSHIPS

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? Self-Disclosure and Intimacy

Social Penetration Theory

TRY THIS: Social Penetration—in Casual and Intimate Relationships The Johari Window and Self-Disclosure

REFLECT ON THIS: Sharing in Close Relationships Using Relational Dialectics to Understand Relationships

TRY THIS: Window Gazing Integration-Separation Stability-Change Expression-Privacy Working through Dialectical Tensions

TRY THIS: Try to See It My Way Relationship Maintenance

TRY THIS: What’s Fair? Relationship Repair: Fix It or End It

Identify the Problem Identify Strategies to Repair the Problem Decide to Dissolve or Save the Relationship

The Dark Side of Relationships:

Dysfunctions and Toxic Communication

REFLECT ON THIS: Abusive Relationships Relationships and Death: Processing Grief

Culture and Relational Intimacy

Gender, Intimacy, and Distance

ANALYZE THIS: Feelings Media and Technology: The Decline of Privacy and Distance

Gaining Communication Competence: Handling Both Relational Closeness and Distance

TRY THIS: At a Distance How Important to You Is This Person? Are You Willing to Initiate Interaction? How Much and What Kind of Intimacy Do You Desire? How Accepting Are You of the Other Person? How Are You Willing to Support the Other Person? Do You Recognize That Your Relationship Will Change? Can Your Relationship Survive the Distance Test? Do You Know When to Continue and When to End a Relationship?

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of the Plane Trip Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

CHAPTER 14. RELATIONSHIPS IN OUR LIVES: FAMILY, WORK, AND HEALTH-RELATED CONTEXTS

Learning Objectives

What Do You Know? The Nature of Familial Communication The Family as Communication

System Family Members Are Interdependent The Family Is Greater than the Sum of Its Parts Family Members Engage in Mutual Influence

TRY THIS: Virginia Satir on “Peoplemaking” Family Communication: Roles and Rules

ANALYZE THIS: Transitions

TRY THIS: The Rules We Live By Communication Patterns in Families

Problematic Communication Patterns Productive Communication Patterns Your Family Network

Culture and the Family Varying Family Composition Varying Communication Styles Varying Family Roles

TRY THIS: Role Call Gender and the Family Media, Technology, and the Family

Interpersonal Communication at Work

TRY THIS: The TV Family Relationships Are the Organization The Dyad and the Organization

A Question of Dependence and Independence A Question of Trust

A Question of Perception Networks, Interaction, and Relationship Satisfaction Working in Teams

Create Healthy Work Climates Practice Effective Decision Making

REFLECT ON THIS: The Effects of Groupthink Culture and the Workplace

Are Workers Dominant or Submissive? Are Workers Individualistic or Collectivistic? How Do Workers Perceive the Need for Space? How Do Workers Perceive Time? How Diverse Are the Interpersonal Needs and Skills of Workers? Are Members of Different Generations Prepared to Work Together?

Gender and the Workplace

TRY THIS: Culture Can Shock Stereotypes of Women in Organizations Stereotypes of Men in Organizations Gender and Work-Life Balance Leadership and Management Style Workplace Pathologies: Bullying and Sexual Harassment

Media, Technology, and the Workplace Media Portrayals Technological Realities

Interpersonal Communication in Health Care Settings The Consumer–Health Care Provider Dyad

Sensitivity Matters Clear Communication Matters Perceptions Matter Decision Making Matters

Culture and Health Communication Gender and Health Care Media, Technology, and Health Care

Media Messages Technology Messages

Gaining Communication Competence across Contexts Prepare to Handle Conflict across Contexts Recognize That You Cannot Stay as You Are or Always Be Happy

and in Good Health

Learn about Each Other

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of the Problematic Reunion Chapter Summary

Check Your Understanding Check Your Skills Key Terms

GLOSSARY

NOTES

PHOTO CREDITS

INDEX

Preface

AN APPLIED APPROACH Interpersonal Communication: Building Connections Together takes an applied approach to exploring the central role of interpersonal communication in our twenty-first-century lives. Whether with family, friends, or coworkers, in personal or professional contexts, enacted face-to-face and up close and personal or online with technological assistance, interpersonal communication skills affect the nature and development of all relationships.

FOCUS ON CULTURE, MEDIA, AND TECHNOLOGY

We had a number of goals in writing this text. First, we wanted to reach students by appealing to their interests in and fascination with popular culture, media, and technology. This volume actively engages students by facilitating their personal observation, processing, and analysis of what occurs as individuals connect interpersonally in the real world and as depicted in popular culture, media, and online. We offer many examples from popular culture and social networking sites to enter students’ worlds and meet them where they are.

FOCUS ON ACTIVE LEARNING AND SKILL BUILDING

Second, we wanted to provide numerous opportunities for students to cocreate content and actively apply and practice what they are learning. Exercises in the text encourage students to compose personal observations as they observe and process interpersonal interactions. As a result, Interpersonal Communication: Building Connections Together is one text that students will be able to call “their own.”

As we noted, this text offers an applied approach. Its strengths are its interactive style and its pedagogy, which affirm the reader as the central player in the life of the textbook. We place our text’s emphasis on how we connect with others and on “how we can do it better” so that the book’s users will discover how they can employ interpersonal skills to enrich their personal and professional lives.

FUNDAMENTAL PREMISES OF THE TEXT

Premise 1: A text on interpersonal communication should consider how popular culture, media, and technology influence the imagined and actual person-to-person interactions of students. Whether subtly or overtly, the impressions of interpersonal communication that we derive from popular culture and online shape our relationships, influencing our views of self and others, affecting what we expect from relationships, and ultimately influencing how we evaluate the effectiveness of our person-to-person relationships and skills.

Premise 2: A text on interpersonal communication should consider how technology, culture, and gender influence person-to-person interactions. We no longer interact with others solely face-to-face. Thus, a key theme of any new book on interpersonal communication needs to be how online connections affect the “MEdia” generation and the dynamics of the interpersonal experience. We also can no longer expect to communicate solely with people who are mirror images of or just like us. Our world is both too complex and too small, and the people with whom we interact are too diverse, for us even to imagine that we could succeed without understanding how gender and culture influence our person-to-person connections. Thus, by developing two additional text themes, how gender and culture preferences influence interaction, we encourage students to take a step toward improving relationship outcomes. No longer are cultural understanding and sensitivity to difference merely assets; now they are prerequisites of effective and insightful interpersonal communication.

Premise 3: A text on interpersonal communication should consider the effects of the varied contexts of our lives. Although it is important to consider the content traditionally covered in interpersonal communication courses, it is also important to widen the scope of our consideration to include interactions occurring in the family, in the workplace, and in health care arenas. The ability to interact effectively across our life spans with friends, family members, coworkers and employers, peers, and health professionals is essential for both personal wellness and professional well-being.

ORGANIZATION OF THE TEXT The book is divided into four main parts: Foundations, Messages, Dynamics, and Relationships in Context. We begin with the building blocks of interpersonal communication (Part I: Foundations), then we consider the kinds of information that we share when we connect interpersonally (Part II: Messages), then we look more closely at the variable factors that affect our interpersonal communication (Part III: Dynamics), and finally we explore the full range of relationships that we build together through communication (Part

IV: Relationships in Context).

Part I comprises three chapters: Chapter 1, “Interpersonal Communication: A First Look”; Chapter 2, “The Impact of Self-Concept”; and Chapter 3, “Perception.” Together, these initial chapters set the stage for our subsequent study of the sharing of messages during interpersonal communication, our consideration of factors influencing how we personally enact interpersonal communication, and, finally, our in-depth exploration of different relational contexts.

Part II includes four chapters: Chapter 4, “Listening”; Chapter 5, “Communicating with Words”; Chapter 6, “Nonverbal Communication”; and Chapter 7, “Conversations.” Together these chapters explore the kinds of messages we share during interpersonal communication and whether these messages are listened to and responded to appropriately.

Part III is composed of four chapters: Chapter 8, “Emotions”; Chapter 9, “Trust and Deception”; Chapter 10, “Power and Influence”; and Chapter 11, “Conflict.” Each of these chapters looks at a different variable affecting the courses of our relationships.

Part IV concludes the book with three chapters: Chapter 12, “Relationship Dynamics”; Chapter 13, “Intimacy and Distance in Relationships”; and Chapter 14, “Relationships in Our Lives: Family, Work, and Heath-Related Contexts.” These chapters explore how the context of a relationship influences its nature and outcomes. Being able to have healthy and meaningful relationships in all spheres of life makes our lives better.

TOOLS FOR LEARNING TOGETHER We have worked hard to ensure that Interpersonal Communication: Building Connections Together fulfills the following four requisites: (1) The text respects and acknowledges student interest in popular culture, media, and technology; (2) the text recognizes the impact that the MEdia age, with its emphasis on self-expression and self-obsession, is having on the interpersonal skills of students and the outcomes of the interpersonal relationships they share; (3) the text expands the communication knowledge base of students, encouraging them to apply interpersonal communication theory and research to their own lives; and (4) the text gives students opportunities to reflect on, practice, and master skills to facilitate their becoming interpersonally competent.

FEATURES

To this end, the text includes pedagogical features that are designed to help students enrich their understanding of fundamental concepts and theories and to help them apply what they have learned to their own interpersonal communication and relationships. The following features reinforce the chapter material and guide students to enhance their interpersonal communication skills:

• Every chapter begins with a list of Learning Outcomes that outlines the key objectives of the chapter, followed by an opening vignette that introduces the relevance of the chapter content through a contemporary example of interpersonal communication in action.

• At the start of each chapter, students will assess their current understanding of interpersonal communication with a quiz feature titled “What Do You Know?” Students can find the answers to the quiz’s true/false items printed upside down at the bottom of the box feature, and they will also find these answers revisited in the margins alongside discussion of the relevant topics within the chapter text. This self-quiz prepares students for the content to be covered and for the outcomes they can expect to achieve by chapter’s end.

• All chapters offer an array of skills-oriented “Try This” boxes, which are introduced regularly to promote active learning and skill building as students make their way through each chapter. The material in these boxes encourages critical inquiry and thought as well as exploration of the role of ethics in interpersonal communication. These boxes feature self-inventories designed to help students assess their learning, skill level, and personal insights into such topics as empathy, reading nonverbal cues, and listening, as well as activities that promote experiential learning and build interpersonal communication skills.

• Every chapter contains one or more “Reflect on This” boxes, designed to make the theories discussed in the text come alive. These boxes highlight the research and/or the experiences of professionals whose work has widened the field’s understanding of interpersonal communication and, at the same time, guide students in applying the theories’ lessons to their own lives.

• Every chapter features “Analyze This” boxes, which encourage students to apply critical thinking to examples of interpersonal

encounters from literature and popular culture. The material in these boxes is designed to promote discussion and facilitate analysis of interpersonal messages and interpersonal communication in action.

• Near the end of every chapter, “Connect the Case” presents a case study that spotlights one or more challenges occurring during interpersonal communication in a face-to-face or mediated environment. Examining these cases involves students in considering chapter content and assessing interpersonal outcomes.

• Special sections in every chapter focus on the topics of gender, culture, media, and technology. These sections address how the concepts covered in the chapter intertwine with these underlying themes of the text.

• At the end of every chapter is a Summary that connects chapter content to the chapter’s Learning Objectives. This is followed by a section titled “Look Back,” which contains two series of questions, “Check Your Understanding” and “Check Your Skills,” that are focused on the concepts and the practical applications the student should have mastered after experiencing the chapter. Page references accompany both sets of questions to guide students back to the relevant sections of the text for further study.

• Key Terms are set in boldface throughout the text to highlight important terminology. Students can find the definition for each term on the page where it is introduced in the Margin Glossary that runs throughout the text or in the Glossary at the end of the book, which collects all of the definitions for a comprehensive review.

ANCILLARIES Interpersonal Communication: Building Connections Together offers comprehensive ancillary resources for instructors and students, to support teaching and learning in the classroom and beyond.

Instructor Teaching Site: www.sagepub.com/gambleic

A password-protected instructor teaching site provides one integrated source for all instructor materials, including the following key components for each chapter:

• Test bank, available in Word format and to PCs and Macs through Diploma software, offers a set of test questions and answers for each chapter. Multiple-choice, true/false, and short-answer/essay questions for every chapter will aid instructors in assessing students’ progress and understanding. The software allows for test creation and customization. The test bank is also available in Microsoft Word format.

• PowerPoint presentations designed to assist with lecture and review, highlighting essential content, features, and artwork from the book.

• Sample syllabi—for semester and quarter classes—provide the instructor with suggested models for creating a course syllabus.

• Carefully selected Web resources and audio and video links feature relevant content for use in independent and classroom-based exploration of key topics.

• SAGE Journal Articles: A “Learning From SAGE Journal Articles” feature provides access to recent, relevant full-text articles from SAGE’s leading research journals. Each article supports and expands on the concepts presented in the chapter. This feature also provides discussion questions to focus and guide student interpretation.

Student Study Site: www.sagepub.com/gambleic

An open-access student study site provides a variety of additional resources to build students’ understanding of the book content and extend their learning beyond the classroom. Students have access to the following features for each chapter:

• Self-quizzes with multiple-choice and true/false questions for every chapter allow students to assess their progress in learning course material independently.

• eFlashcards reinforce student understanding and learning of key terms and concepts that are outlined in the book.

• Study Questions: Chapter-specific questions help launch discussion by prompting students to engage with the material and by reinforcing important content.

• Web resources direct students to relevant online sites for further research on important chapter topics.

• Video and audio links feature meaningful content for use in independent or classroom-based exploration of key concepts and skills.

We believe that our instructional package—composed of the text’s contents and the pedagogical aids we intersperse both throughout chapters and online— will motivate students to internalize the knowledge and develop the skills they need to make interpersonal connections and develop meaningful and healthy interpersonal relationships, whether their interactions occur face-to-face or online. We hope you agree!

Acknowledgments

How lucky we are to have had the opportunity to work with the very talented professionals at SAGE again! Senior acquisitions editor Matthew Byrnie together with his team, Stephanie Palermini and Nathan Davidson, made writing this book both fulfilling and fun. Matt’s creativity and astute understanding of our goals freed us to produce a textbook on interpersonal communication that fulfilled our vision.

We also owe a debt of gratitude to senior project editors Eric Garner and Astrid Virding for so skillfully guiding our efforts, copy editor Judy Selhorst for her careful and insightful reading of the manuscript, assistant editors Megan Koraly and Terri Accomazzo for the many hours of time devoted to working on the ancillaries, senior marketing manager Liz Thornton and market development manager Michelle Rodgerson for using their promotional savvy to bring the book to market, permissions editor Karen Ehrmann for her thoroughness, and designer Scott Van Atta for the text’s visual appeal and engaging layout.

We are especially appreciative for our reviewers who so generously and unselfishly shared with us their knowledge and teaching insights; we credit them with helping to produce a book that speaks directly to the needs and interests of students.

Teri & Mike

SAGE is grateful to the following reviewers for providing helpful feedback during various stages of manuscript development:

Andrea R. Acker, Westmoreland County Community College

Luann Okel Adams, Mid-State Technical College

Alicia Andersen, Sierra College

Tim Anderson, Elgin Community College

Laurie Arliss, Ithaca College

Michael Irvin Arrington, University of Kentucky

Leonard Assante, Volunteer State Community College

Lisa Nelson Bamber, Otero Junior College

Polly A. Begley, Fresno City College

Heather Bixler, College of the Sequoias

Ellen Bland, Central Carolina Community College

Derek Bolen, Angelo State University

Diane Boynton, Monterey Peninsula College

Leah Bryant, DePaul University

Jack Byer, Bucks County Community College

Carlotta Campbell, College of Alameda

Chelsea J. Chalk, Ancilla College

Yanrong Chang, University of Texas—Pan American

Yea-Wen Chen, Ohio University

Anita P. Chirco, Keuka College

Margaret K. Chojnacki, Barry University

Karen Clark, Spokane Community College

Colleen Colaner, University of Missouri

William D. Cole, Elizabethtown Community and Technical College

Kathleen Czech, Point Loma Nazarene University

Marianne Dainton, La Salle University

Patricia A. Dobson, Eastern New Mexico University

Aimee DuBois, Normandale Community College

Jill C. Dustin, Old Dominion University

Jen Eden, Northern Illinois University

Leonard M. Edmonds, Arizona State University

Nichole Egbert, Kent State University

Diana Elrod-Sarnecki, Des Moines Area Community College

Bo Feng, University of California, Davis

Diane M. Ferrero-Paluzzi, Iona College

Tracy Frederick, Southwestern College

Sheryl A. Friedley, George Mason University

Daniel D. Fultz, Bluffton University

Joanie Gibbons-Anderson, Riverside City College

Robert J. Glenn, III, Owensboro Community and Technical College

Carlos G. Godoy, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Todd Lee Goen, Christopher Newport University

Alan K. Goodboy, Bloomsburg University

Debra Harper, Lone Star College-Greenspoint Center

Jim Hasenauer, California State University at Northridge

Kristin Haun, Pellissippi State Community College

Leslie A. Henderson, McLennan Community College

Robert Heppler, Broward Community College

Jason Hough, Hartnell Community College

Jessica R. Hurless, Casper College

Rebecca Imes, Carroll University

Kirsten Isgro, State University of New York, Plattsburgh

Robert S. Jersak, Century College

JoAnna Johns, Atlantic Cape Community College

Cynthia B. Johnson, College of the Sequoias

Rod Kenyon, California State University, Chico

Flora Keshishian, St. John’s University

J. Clint Kinkead, Dalton State College

Kathryne Kiser, Metropolitan Community College—Longview

Frederick Knight, Eastern New Mexico University Ruidoso Branch Community College

Tony L. Kroll, Tarrant County College

J. Mignon Kucia, Mississippi College

Sandra Lakey, Pennsylvania College of Technology

Karenza Lambert, Ivy Tech Community College

Emily J. Langan, Wheaton College

Kimberly A. Laux, University of Michigan—Flint

Kristen LeBlanc, Texas State University-San Marcos

Jennifer A. Lundberg Anders, West Shore Community College

Kozhi Sidney Makai, Lone Star College—Montgomery

Tracy Marafiote, State University of New York, Fredonia

Barbara J. Mayo, Northeast Lakeview College

Ché V. Meneses, Ohlone College & California State University, East Bay

Michelle Millard, Wayne State University

Nina-Jo Moore, Appalachian State University

Mark T. Morman, Baylor University

Thomas P. Morra, Northern Virginia Community College

Randall Mueller, Gateway Technical College

Kellie L. Mzik, Georgia Military College

Mary E. Nagy, Bloomsburg University

Elizabeth J. Natalle, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Christine L. North, Ohio Northern University

Jill O’Brien, DePaul University

Laura Oliver, University of Texas—San Antonio

Chuka Onwumechili, Howard University

Lisa M. Orick-Martinez, Central New Mexico Community College

Steve Ott, Kalamazoo Valley Community College

Kate Pantinas, Ivy Tech Community College

Dennis T. Payne, Texas State University

Douglas C. Pierce, Ridgewater College

Marlene M. Preston, Virginia Tech

Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter, Texas Tech University

Terry Quinn, Gateway Technical College

Janice Ralya, Jefferson State Community College

Diane Reuszer, Northeastern Junior College

Nancy Reynolds, Angelina College

Kathleen Roberts, Duquesne University

Sudeshna Roy, Stephen F. Austin State University

Leslie Ramos Salazar, Arizona State University

Kelly Renee Schutz, Ivy Tech Community College

Xiaowei Shi, Middle Tennessee State University

Natalie E. Shubert, Ohio University

Cheryl L. Skiba-Jones, Ivy Tech Community College

Brent C. Sleasman, Gannon University

Garth H. Sleight, Miles Community College

Megan K. Sokolowski, Mid-State Technical College

Jamie Stech, Iowa Western Community College

Tony Strawn, Henderson Community College

Natalie L. Sydorenko, University of Akron

Christa Tess, Minneapolis Community and Technical College

Carl L. Thameling, University of Louisiana at Monroe

Henry J. Venter, National University—Fresno

Dr. Matthew S. Vos, Covenant College

Zuoming Wang, University of North Texas

Lindsey Welsch, Johnson County Community College

Bradley S. Wesner, Nova Southeastern University

Kylene J. Wesner, Broward College

Denise Woolsey, Yavapai College

Alesia Woszidlo, University of Kansas

Ibrahim Yoldash, Indiana University Northwest

Christina Yoshimura, University of Montana

Jason Ziebart, Central Carolina Community College

Phyllis S. Zrzavy, Franklin Pierce University

About the Authors

Teri Kwal Gamble (PhD, New York University; BA, and MA, Lehman College, CUNY) and Michael W. Gamble (PhD, New York University; BA and MFA, University of Oklahoma) are professional writers of education and training materials and the coauthors of numerous textbooks and trade books. Their most recent publication is the eleventh edition of their best-selling text Communication Works (2012). Among their other books are Sales Scripts That Sell (second edition, 2007), The Gender Communication Connection (2002), and Public Speaking in the Age of Diversity (second edition, 1998). Teri and Michael are also the cofounders of Interact Training Systems, a consulting firm that conducts seminars, workshops, and short courses for business and professional organizations across the United States.

Additionally, Michael served as an officer and taught leadership skills for the U.S. Army Infantry School during the Vietnam War. Together, Teri and Michael also produce training and marketing materials for the real estate industry.

Teri and Michael have two grown children, Matthew, a scientist at Einstein Medical School, and Lindsay, who has completed her MBA and is currently finishing law school. They share their home with twin poodles —Charlie and Lucy.

This is dedicated to the most important people in our lives, our children, Lindsay and her husband Daniel, and Matthew and his love Tong. They

define the importance of interpersonal communication.

1Chapter

“I truly believe that life is a contact sport. You never know just who you’ll meet and what role they might play in your career or your life.”

–Ken Kragen

Communication Consultant

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION:

A First Look LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this chapter, you should be able to demonstrate mastery of the following learning outcomes:

1. Define interpersonal communication, distinguishing it from other types of communication.

2. Use a communication model to identify the essential elements and transactional nature of the interpersonal communication process.

3. Explain the functions interpersonal communication serves.

4. Describe the characteristics, core principles, and axioms of interpersonal communication

5. Explain how gender and culture affect interpersonal communication.

6. Provide examples of how digital media are reshaping interpersonal contacts.

7. Develop a plan to improve interpersonal communication.

et’s talk about interpersonal communication. How do you decide whether to speak with a person face-to-face or send a text? What if you had to choose between calling and texting? A lot depends on the situation and the other person. Or does it?

According to a report issued by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, we now communicate more often via text. In fact, more than one-third of young adults send on average more than one hundred texts per day, making the text message their focal communication strategy—their “go to” form of interaction.1 Quite simply, for many of us texting is our dominant daily mode of communicating.2

How do you decide whether to speak with a person face- to-face or send a text?

Are you among the two-thirds of people more likely to use your cell phone to text your friend rather than talk to her on the cell? And how do you want your friend to get in touch with you? Do you prefer her to call and talk to you over the phone, or would you rather she text too? Your answer likely depends on how frequently you text and whether you think of texting as easier and more convenient than other communication channels.

We have an abundance of communication choices at our disposal. With so many available options, making the right choice is not always easy, and not necessarily the one most favor. Our goal is to help you explore the benefits your choices present. While recognizing the range of communication technologies open to you, this book will help you improve your skills and develop your abilities to communicate most effectively and appropriately with others—to make sound decisions about how to communicate—whether by text messaging, using social networking sites, calling on a cell phone or landline, instant messaging, e-mailing, or talking face-to-face.

WHAT DO YOU KNOW?

Before continuing your reading of this chapter, which of the following five statements do you believe to be true and which do you believe to be false?

1. Communication is normally intentional. T F

2. Interpersonal communication always is between two people.

T F

3. If you already consider yourself a good communicator, then how you engage others does not need to change.

T F

4. Interpersonal communication affects your health. T F

5. Machines are altering the nature of interpersonal communication.

T F

Read the chapter to discover if you’re right or if you’ve made any erroneous assumptions.

We do it daily. We do it with people we have known all our lives, and we do it with people we have just met. Every day, we engage in interpersonal communication with family, friends, and strangers alike, face-to-face and online, in person and via our phones. Through our personal contacts, we build connections and establish relationships to satisfy our social needs and realize our personal goals. As we relate to others, the messages we send and receive shape us. In fact, there is a direct link between how good we are at communicating and how satisfying or fulfilling we find life.3 Let’s look more closely at the process known as interpersonal communication.

Interpersonal communication is a fact of life.

True or False 1. Communication is normally intentional. False. Communication is also accidental or unintentional.

WHAT IS INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION?

Communication is our link to humanity. In its broadest sense, it is a process involving the deliberate or accidental transfer of meaning. One person does or says something, thereby engaging in symbolic behavior, while others observe what was done or said and attribute meaning to it. Whenever you observe or give meaning to behavior, communication is taking place.

Figure 1.1 Texting is Most Common Daily Communication Method for Teens

SOURCE: Based on information from the Pew Internet & American Life Project.

Communication: A process involving both deliberate and accidental transfer of meaning.

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION IS ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS

There are many kinds of communication. We distinguish one type of communication from others based on the number of persons involved, the formality of the interaction, and the opportunity to give and receive feedback. For example, since intrapersonal communication occurs when you think or talk to yourself, it requires only a single communicator—you! In contrast to intrapersonal communication, interpersonal communication is the ongoing, ever-changing process that occurs when you interact with another person, forming a dyad, which is defined as two people communicating with each other. Both individuals in a dyad share the responsibility for determining the nature of a relationship by creating meaning from the interaction. Thus, anytime we communicate with another person, whether a friend, parent, coworker, or employer, we are communicating interpersonally. It is very common for communicators to use digital media to get their messages across to one another or the public by blogging, texting, tweeting, Instant messaging, e-mailing, or posting in a social networking site such as Facebook (see Figure 1.1).

True or False 2. Interpersonal Communication always is between two people. True. Interpersonal communication occurs when two people form a dyad, also known as two people communicating with one another.

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION TAKES TWO

First, let’s consider the quantitative aspects of our interpersonal interactions. The fact that interpersonal communication takes two people means that it is indivisible. Without the second person, interpersonal communication is impossible. Thus, the parties to interpersonal communication are a duo: a couple, a pair, or perhaps adversaries. From an interpersonal perspective, even groups of three or more individuals are viewed as composites of dyads, effectively serving as the foundations for separate pairings and potential coalitions. Without a dyad, a relationship

does not exist, and without a relationship, there is no interpersonal communication.4 This means that if one person withdraws from the relationship, then that relationship terminates—at least for the time being or until the connection between them is reestablished. The qualitative aspect of interpersonal communication is another story. We measure the quality of an interpersonal relationship along a continuum, with “intimate communication” at one end and “impersonal communication” at the opposite end. The more personally we interact with another person, the more “interpersonal” our relationship becomes. When we engage in interpersonal communication, our goal is to treat one another as genuine persons, not as objects, and to respond to each other as unique individuals with whom we create a distinct relational culture, not as people merely playing roles.5

The more personal a relationship becomes, the more interdependent the two people become, sharing thoughts and feelings with each other. Our lives become interconnected, especially when contrasted with how we relate to persons with whom we are uninvolved and to whom we don’t reveal much about ourselves. We develop personal relationships because of the intrinsic rewards we derive from them; we find them emotionally, intellectually, and perhaps even spiritually fulfilling. In contrast, we have impersonal relationships usually because of the extrinsic rewards they offer, such as maintaining professional working relationships with others to help us reach our goals. Which kinds of relationships do you have more of, those that are impersonal or those that are personal in nature?

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION IS A LIFELONG PROJECT

The effectiveness of interpersonal relationships depends on the extent to which we practice and exhibit interpersonal skills. While we may be born communicators, we are not born with effective interpersonal skills—those we need to learn. Nor are effective skills static; the same techniques may not work for all people in all situations. The culture of each person, his or her gender, the environment, and the individual’s goals will determine how that person approaches and processes interpersonal communication.

Intrapersonal communication: Communication requiring only a single communicator; communication with oneself.

Interpersonal communication: The ongoing, ever-changing process that

occurs when one person interacts with another person, forming a dyad; communication occurring within a relationship. Dyad: Two individuals interacting; a two-person relationship.

Just as every person represents a unique combination of physical, psychological, education, gender, and cultural characteristics that distinguish us from one another, each new relationship teaches us a little bit more about the nature of people and interpersonal communication. Each new relationship increases our comfort at interacting not only with those who share our characteristics but also with those whose attitudes, life experiences, and perspectives differ from ours.

TRY THIS: Today, Who Is a Stranger? When you were a young child, your parents and/or caregivers probably cautioned you not to speak to strangers. However, travel opportunities and social networks such as Facebook make interacting with strangers much more commonplace, even ordinary. Answer the following questions:

1. To what extent, if any, are you more willing to interact with a stranger online than at the mall or when on a trip? Explain.

2. How does the anonymity or privacy of online relationships increase or decrease your level of personal comfort?

3. To what extent, if any, do you think parents or caregivers should restrict the time young children spend interacting online? To what extent, if any, do you think you should limit the time you spend in social networks?

4. In your opinion, which is more likely to result in a lasting interpersonal relationship—a friendship that begins online, an “old- fashioned” pen-pal type of friendship that depends on U.S. mail delivery, or a relationship that begins with both parties face-to-face? Explain your answer with reasons.

As we grow and learn, we must continually revise and update our personal theories of what works during interpersonal contacts, or our assumptions will compel us to repeat interpersonal scenarios or scripts that are doomed

to fail. The effective interpersonal communicator does not take others for granted. Instead of following stereotypes, the effective interpersonal communicator is guided by knowledge and skill.

Our sense of personal identity results from and influences our interpersonal relationships. When we do it well, interpersonal communication helps us work through problems, ultimately enhancing our feelings of self-worth. When we do it poorly, however, rather than enlarging us, it limits our growth and frustrates our achievement of our unique potential.

Whether an interpersonal relationship is productive or not depends on how satisfying the relationship is and how much attention we pay to its health. Having good interpersonal skills can mean the difference between happiness and unhappiness or success and failure in multiple arenas or life contexts—home, job, school, health care settings, and society—as well as across cultures and generations. Enhanced understanding of the factors in play when two people communicate, whether in a personal or a professional relationship, increases an individual’s chances of developing interpersonal competence—the ability to communicate effectively.6 We increase communication competence by observing ourselves and others, assessing what we observe, practicing specific behaviors, and then predicting and evaluating the outcomes of our interactions, with the goal of improving our communication skills.

Interpersonal competence: The ability to use appropriate communication to build and maintain an effective relationship.

As you read the rest of this chapter, consider the following questions about yourself:

Having good interpersonal skills is key in achieving happiness and success.

1. How effective am I at communicating with people from diverse cultures?

2. Am I equally effective interacting with males and females, and with individuals whose sexual orientations differ from my own?

3. How easy is it for me to develop relationships with people my own age and those of different ages?

4. To what extent am I able to maintain self-control when I interact with others? Under what conditions do I lose control?

5. How, and to what extent, do I use technology in my interpersonal relationships? In what ways is technology changing my interpersonal communication?

Societal problems related to factors such as ethnocentrism, sexism, violence, and health can be lessened, at least to some degree, if we improve our ability to adapt to a changing world and connect interpersonally with others in more effective ways. To this end, we need to explore interpersonal communication, including the field’s theories, practice, and contexts. By considering relevant research, putting theory into practice, and applying what we learn to the contexts of our lives, we can develop our interpersonal communication skills. The more we learn, the more extensive our repertoire of acceptable behavioral choices becomes and the more flexible we become, thereby improving our chances

to sustain rather than sever needed relationships.

The effectiveness of our personal relationships depends on the communication choices we make. Using communication we present ourselves to others and either work out or compound relationship problems. Because interpersonal relationships can be destructive (yes, they can have a dark or destructive side that causes one or both parties to experience emotional or physical pain), our personal and professional well-being depends on their being effective. Thus, a key goal of this book is to help you build and maintain effective interpersonal connections with a broad array of people.

MODELS OF INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

Whether we are able to exchange messages and negotiate or share meaning during person-to-person encounters depends on how well we handle the essential elements active in the process. For example, depending on the situation, patting someone on the back may be perceived as friendly and supportive or as a form of sexual harassment. There are seven key elements that influence interpretation of this act (see Table 1.1):

ANALYZE THIS: Are You in a Disguise?

In the poem Anonymous, 21st-century poet Samuel Manashe suggests that when in the company of another person, too often we pretend to be someone we are not, keeping our actual identity secret and hoping to remain unknown or anonymous.

Have you ever asked a question like the one Manashe asks in the poem? Do you suppose anyone has asked such a question about you?

How does maintaining anonymity online, for example, affect interaction?

Anonymous

Truth to tell, And grow old

Seldom told Self-disguised—

Under oath, Who are you

We live lies I talk to?

1. How might remaining anonymous be enabling to someone? 2. What could compel you to disguise yourself or wear a mask when

interacting with another person on or offline? 3. How would you handle the pain, frustration, and anger caused by

feeling the need to suppress your cultural identity or hide your feelings to maintain a relationship?

1. The people involved

2. The message(s) that each person sends and/or perceives

3. The channel(s) in use

4. The amount of noise present

5. The communication context

6. The feedback sent in response

7. The act’s effect(s) on the individuals involved

The better we understand these essential elements of interpersonal communication, the more likely we are to improve our interpersonal

communication competence and skills. The more we understand how interpersonal communication works, the greater the likelihood it will work for us. So, let us look more closely at each of the elements in play.

PEOPLE

Recall that interpersonal communication between any two people ranges from “impersonal” at one end of an imaginary continuum to “intimate” at the other end.

When you respond impersonally to another person, you communicate with him based on your limited knowledge of the categories in which you place that person—that is, the social groups or the culture to which you believe he belongs—rather than on your personal experience interacting with that individual.

In contrast, when you respond to someone personally, you respond to her as an individual, drawing on your knowledge of her personality to guide your interactions. In other words, your past experience with the individual allows you to differentiate her from the groups to which she belongs. You now take this unique person and her needs into account when you communicate.

As a relationship develops and you get to know someone better, not only can you describe the person’s behavior, but you can also more accurately predict how he or she will behave when facing a particular situation or set of circumstances. When you know a person very well, sometimes you can also explain that person’s behavior, offering reasons for his or her actions. For instance, when you share an impersonal relationship with someone at work, you can likely describe his behavior—maybe his procrastination in completing an assignment. When you see a supervisor giving him a project to work on, you may be able to predict that he will not complete it on time. Were you to share a more personal relationship with your coworker, however, you might also be able to explain the reasons behind the procrastination—why he is unable to meet a deadline—such as concerns about a child’s illness or feelings of inadequacy.

How you pat someone on the back communicates.

TABLE 1.1 The Essential Elements of Interpersonal Communication

Each party in an interpersonal relationship participates in the functions of sending and receiving messages. Each functions simultaneously as sender

and receiver, both parties giving out and taking in messages. For example, in the following exchange both Jana and Karl give and receive messages:

True or False 3. If you already consider yourself a good communicator, then how you engage others does not need to change. False. What worked at one point in time may not work at another point in time.

Jana: I’m so tired. I wish we didn’t have to go to the Joneses’ party.

Karl: You always feel tired whenever we have plans to go to a party for someone I work with.

Jana: Why do you have to attack me when I say how I feel?

Karl: What’s the matter with you? I’m not attacking you. I’m only commenting on what I observe and experience directly.

Jana: Is that all? Give me a break. Don’t I have a right to be tired?

Karl: Sure you do. Just tell me one thing. Why do you never feel tired when we’re going to a party hosted by your friends?

Interpersonal communication is transactional in nature. It is a process in which transmission and reception occur simultaneously and source and receiver continually influence one another. What we think of each other and what we believe each other to know affect the messages we send.7 Each party in a dyad simultaneously performs the roles of sender and receiver, also known as a role duality. How the individuals perform the

roles, or how good they are at sending and receiving, depends on what they bring to the relationship, including their feelings about themselves, their knowledge about communication, and their attitudes, values, and goals. All these elements influence how well a sender encodes his or her thoughts, feelings, emotions, and attitudes by putting them into a form another can relate to, and how the receiver decodes the thoughts, feelings, emotions, and attitudes of the sender by interpreting them into messages.

TRY THIS: Rating Relationships Think about some of the relationships you have had over your lifetime.

1. Identify two of them: the first, an extremely satisfying interpersonal relationship and, the second, an extremely frustrating one.

2. Identify the specific aspects of each relationship that made it satisfying or frustrating for you.

3. After summarizing the characteristics and qualities that differentiate your most satisfying relationship from your most frustrating one, propose steps you might have taken to increase your satisfaction with the relationship you found frustrating.

MESSAGES

We negotiate the meaning we derive from interpersonal communication by sending and receiving verbal and nonverbal messages. Whom we speak to, what we choose to speak about, what we do as we interact, the words we use, the sound of our voices, our posture, our facial expressions, our touch, and even our smell constitute the message or the content of our communication. Everything we do as a sender or a receiver has potential message value for the person with whom we are interacting or for someone observing the interaction.

Role duality: The simultaneous performance of the roles of sender and receiver by the members of a dyad.

Message: The content of communication.

Messages can be conveyed through any one of our five senses: auditory, visual, gustatory, olfactory, or tactile. They can be heard, seen, tasted, smelled, or felt, and they are situational/ manipulational, or communicated by the environment. Some messages—such as a caress, a kiss, or the words “I love you”—are more personal than others that could be sent to any numbers of persons. Some of our messages we send purposefully (“I want to be very clear about this”), while others, such as nervous tics, we emit unconsciously or accidentally (“I didn’t know you knew how I felt about this”). Everything we do when interacting with another person has potential message value as long as the other person is observant and gives meaning to our behavior. Whether we frown, jump for joy, move closer, turn away, or go on and on, we are communicating messages that have some effect on someone else.

CHANNELS

Messages travel via a channel, a medium that connects sender and receiver, much as a bridge connects two locations. In face-to-face communication, we send and receive messages through the five senses as discussed above. In effect, we may use multiple channels at the same time to communicate a single message. In fact, under most circumstances, interpersonal communication is a multichanneled interaction using visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory, and situational/ manipulational means to convey both verbal and nonverbal messages. Consider a first date: to prepare, you make sure you look and smell nice; you choose a quiet setting to ensure you can hear each other; and you generally put your best face forward in both verbal and nonverbal ways in order to say, “I like you and I hope you like me too.”

We use each of our five senses to convey messages.

Capable communicators are adept channel switchers. They know how to use sound, sight, touch, taste, smell, and the environment, as well as traditional words and nonverbal signs, to get messages across. However, if you find yourself consistently tuning in on just one channel, you might miss the most salient parts of a message. For instance, if you speak to people only over the phone, you might miss the underlying message when your best friend asks, “Is everything okay? I haven’t seen you in a while.” While we may prefer to send or receive messages through a particular channel, we should pay attention to and use all of the available channels.

Today, with computer-mediated communication, we have a richness of channels to choose from. In addition to face-to-face contact, we have texting and instant messaging, for example. If one channel is closed or damaged, we can open another to compensate. For instance, rather than assuming that a blind or sight-impaired person will be able to recognize us by our voice, we should also name ourselves. Since the blind person is unable to see the visual cues we use to color in or shade the meaning of a verbal message, we may also need to take special care to ensure that the meanings we want conveyed are contained in the words we choose and the expressiveness of our voice.

Channels are like bridges; they connect us to one another.

NOISE

In communication studies, noise includes anything that interferes with or impedes our ability to send or receive a message. Noise distracts communicators by focusing their attention on something extraneous to the communication act. Effective communicators find ways to ensure their messages get through accurately despite any interfering noise.

Channel: A medium or passageway through which a message travels.

Noise: Anything that interferes with or impedes the ability to send or receive a message.

Noise emanates from both internal and external sources. The words used, the environment, physical discomfort, psychological state, and intellectual ability can all function as noise. As the level of noise increases, it becomes more and more unlikely that we will be successful at negotiating or sharing meaning. Among the external sources of noise are the sight, sound, smell, and feel of the environment. A drab room, an overly warm space, a loud siren, an offensive odor, and too many conversations occurring at the same time are all examples of environmental noise.

In your opinion does a garage band constitute noise?

Among the internal sources of noise are personal thoughts and feelings. Racism, sexism, feelings of inadequacy, hunger, excessive shyness or extroversion, and deficient or excessive knowledge can all interfere with the ability to send and receive messages effectively. Most of us find it easier to cope with external noise than with internal noise because closing a window, for example, is usually a lot easier than opening a mind or changing a personality. Have you created or been influenced by noise in any of your relationships today? Which kind(s) of noise typically cause you the greatest problems? (See Table 1.2.)

FEEDBACK

Feedback is information we receive in response to messages we have sent. It can be both verbal and nonverbal and lets us know how another person is responding to us. Feedback provides clues as to “how we are coming across,” whether we were heard through the noise or interference, and how the receiver interpreted our communicative efforts. Feedback reveals whether or not our message was interpreted as we hoped and, if not, which portions of the message need to be resent.

WATCH THIS 1.1 For a video on using communication channels visit the student study site.

Feedback can be positive or negative. Positive feedback enhances

behavior in progress. It serves a reinforcing function, causing us to continue our behavior. In contrast, negative feedback stops behavior in progress. It serves a corrective function, prompting us to discontinue one or more behaviors because of their apparent ineffectiveness. In this way, negative feedback helps eliminate behavior that others judge inappropriate.

Feedback: Information received in exchange for a message sent.

Positive feedback: Responses that enhance behavior in progress.

Negative feedback: Responses that stop behavior in progress.

TABLE 1.2 Types of Noise

Semantic noise Noise due to the failure to understand the intended meaning of one or more words or the context in which the words are being used (persons speaking different languages, using jargon and “technicalese”)

Physiological noise

Noise due to personal illness, discomfort, or a physical problem including speech, visual, auditory, or memory impairment (difficulty articulating, hearing or sight loss, fatigue, disease)

Psychological noise

Noise due to anxiety, confusion, bias, past experience, or emotional arousal that interferes with communication (sender or receiver prejudice, closedmindedness, rage)

Intellectual noise

Noise due to information overload or underload (over- or underpreparedness)

Environmental noise

Noise due to the sound, smell, sight, and feel of the environment or physical communication space that distracts attention from what is being said or done (cars honking, garbage rotting, people talking at once, cellular or computer interference)

Because we constantly communicate with ourselves (even as we communicate interpersonally), feedback can emanate from both internal and external sources. Internal feedback is the feedback you give yourself

as you assess your own performance during an interpersonal transaction. External feedback is feedback you receive from the other person. Competent communicators are sensitive to both feedback types, since both serve important functions.

Feedback often focuses on a person or a message. We can, for example, comment on a person’s appearance or message effectiveness. In addition, we can be totally honest about feedback, offering low-monitored feedback, or we can carefully craft a response designed to serve a particular purpose, offering high-monitored feedback. Whether our feedback is spontaneous or guarded depends on how much we trust the other person and how much power that person has over our future.

We can also offer immediate or delayed feedback. Immediate feedback instantly reveals its effect on us. For example, after someone tells us a joke, we may laugh really hard. Other times, however, a gap occurs between the receipt of the message and the delivery of feedback. For example, we can nod our head yes or shake our head no every time the other person says something we do or do not agree with. Or we can withhold our reaction until after she or he has finished speaking. When we interview for a job, we are rarely told immediately after the interview whether we will be given the position. Instead, we receive delayed feedback; sometimes days, weeks, or even months pass before we know whether or not the interview was successful.

Feedforward is a variant of feedback. However, instead of being sent after a message is delivered, it is sent prior to a message’s delivery as a means of revealing something about the message to follow. Feedforward introduces messages by opening the communication channel and previewing the message. Phatic communication (see Chapter 12), that is, a message that opens a communication channel, such as this text’s cover or preface, serves as an example of feedforward.

Internal feedback: A person’s response to his or her own performance.

External feedback: Responses received from others.

Low-monitored feedback: Feedback that is sincere and spontaneous; feedback delivered without careful planning.

High-monitored feedback: Feedback offered to serve a specific purpose; feedback that is sent intentionally.

Feedforward: A variant of feedback sent prior to a message’s delivery as a means of revealing something about to follow.

Phatic communication: Superficial interaction designed to open the channel between individuals.

Context: The setting in which communication takes place.

CONTEXT

The environmental and situational or cultural context in which the communication occurs (its setting) can also affect its outcome. The environmental context is the physical location of the interaction. The situational or cultural context comprises the life spaces or cultural backgrounds of the parties in the dyad. In many ways, surrounding culture and physical, social, psychological, and temporal settings are integral parts of communication.

The physical setting includes the specific location for the interaction, that is the setting’s appearance and condition. A candlelit exchange may have a different feel and outcome from one held in a busy, brightly lit office. The social setting derives from the status relationships and roles assumed by each party. Some relationships seem friendlier and are less formal than others. The psychological setting includes the interaction’s emotional dimensions. It influences how individuals feel about and respond to each other. The temporal setting includes not only the time of day the interaction takes place but also the history, if any, that the parties to it share. Any previous communication experience that you and another person have had will influence the way you treat each other in the present. The cultural context is composed of the beliefs, values, and rules of communication that affect your behavior. If you and the other person are from different cultures, the rules you each follow may confuse the other or lead to missing chances for effective and meaningful exchanges. Sometimes the context is so obvious or intrusive that it exerts great control over our interaction by restricting or dominating how we relate to one another; other times it seems so natural that we virtually ignore it.

EFFECT

As we interact with each other, we each experience an effect—meaning that we are influenced in some way by the interaction. One person may

feel the effects more than the other person. One person may react more quickly than the other. The effects may be immediately observable or initially not observable at all.

An effect can be emotional, physical, cognitive, or any combination of the three. As a result of interacting with another we can experience feelings of elation or depression (emotional); we fight and argue or walk away in the effort to avoid a fight or argument (physical); or we can develop new ways of thinking about events, increase our knowledge base, or become confused (cognitive).

There is a lot more to interpersonal communication and its ultimate effects than we may immediately realize. In fact, current relationships may best be considered examples of “unfinished business.”8

How does your current physical setting affect you?

VISUALIZING COMMUNICATION

To be sure, the thinking about interpersonal communication has evolved over the years. The earliest model—a linear or unidirectional model— depicted communication as going in one direction only (see Figure 1.2). Questions such as “Did you get my message?,” statements such as “I gave

you that idea,” and acts such as leaving someone a note with instructions give voice to this one-way perspective. While containing many of the elements identified earlier, notice that the linear model omits both feedback and context.

Figure 1.2 Linear Model of Interpersonal Communication

Effect: The result of a communication episode.

Linear or unidirectional model: A representation of communication that depicts it as going in only one direction.

Gradually, a more realistic two-way model—known as an interaction model—came to be the model of choice (see Figure 1.3). The interaction model visualizes interpersonal communication not as a one-way event but as a back-and-forth process, much like a game of tennis; it also acknowledges the presence and effects of both feedback and context. However, though more accurate than the one-way model, the interaction model fails to capture the complexity of interpersonal communication, including the reality that interpersonal communication does not involve just a back-and-forth action and reaction as might occur when you send a text and your friend responds.

Figure 1.3 Interaction Model of Interpersonal Communication

Figure 1.4 Transactional Model of Interpersonal Communication

Interaction model: A representation of communication as a back-and- forth process.

Many communication exchanges involve source and receiver responding to one another simultaneously rather than sequentially. Thus, a more recently developed and even more realistic way to visualize how the elements at work during interpersonal communication dynamically relate to each other is a transactional model, as shown in Figure 1.4. The transactional model’s strength is that it depicts sending and receiving as simultaneous rather than distinctly separate acts. By doing so, it helps us visualize the vital complexity of interpersonal interaction by showing us that source and receiver send messages to and receive messages from each other at the same time, reflecting the reality of a conversation. (See Table 1.3 for a summary of the various models’ strengths and weaknesses.)

TABLE 1.3 Advantages and Limitations of Communication Models

HOW DOES INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION ENHANCE OUR LIVES?

Communicating interpersonally helps us discover who we are; it fulfills our need for human contact and personal relationships, and it can prompt us to change our attitudes and behavior. In these ways, interpersonal communication serves psychological, social, information, and influence functions.

Transactional model: A representation of communication that depicts transmission and reception occurring simultaneously, demonstrating that source and receiver continually influence one another.

IT FULFILLS PSYCHOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS

TRY THIS: Making Model Sense Use the transactional model of interpersonal communication in Figure 1.4 to analyze the following dyadic scenario. Identify how each of the essentials of interpersonal communication included in the model— people, messages, channels, noise, feedback, context, and effect— makes its presence felt during the interaction.

Simona (approaching a restaurant table): Hi, Kevin. I thought I

recognized the back of your head. How ya doing? Long time no see.

Kevin (turning, somewhat started): I recognized your perfume—I used to love it when—(abrupt break). It’s been a while, hasn’t it? When was the last time we got together? Is it a year?

Simona (smiling): Longer than that. I haven’t heard from or seen you since your divorce from Jan.

Kevin Haven’t seen me since the divorce. That makes it almost two years and twenty-four days, then.

Simona Time sure goes fast when you’re having fun, doesn’t it? Well, you look great. Life’s been good to you, huh?

Kevin Yeah. I just got back from six months’ troubleshooting in Singapore. I got a promotion, and I’m finally making the kind of money I deserve.

Simona Good for you! Emilio and I still see Jan, you know.

Kevin Do you? How’s she doing? I haven’t spoken to her in two years, either.

Simona You haven’t spoken to your ex since the divorce? Actually, I’m meeting her for lunch today.

Kevin Didn’t seem to be anything left to say to her. (Does a double take) Did you say you’re meeting Jan here? I was just leaving. I’ve got to get back to the office. I’ve got a key client coming. It was sure nice running into you.

Simona Sure thing. I’ll tell Jan you say hi.

Kevin No. Don’t even tell her you saw me. It would just open up her old wounds.

Simona Why would it do that? She’s great, has a great job, and she’s seeing one of Emilio’s friends. Besides, I’m sure she’d like to know you’re doing so well.

Kevin So she picked up the pieces, did she? I didn’t think it would happen that fast. She was so broken up, so devastated by my leaving.

Simona Life goes on.

Kevin Guess it does. Well, gotta go. Be good.

Simona (Under her breath, as he walks away) What a conceited jerk!

Messages Simona’s message: Kevin’s message:

Channels

Noise

Feedback Simona’s message: Kevin’s message:

Context

Effect The effect on Kevin: The effect on Simona:

First and foremost, just as we need water, food, and shelter, we need people. When we are isolated or cut off from human contact, our health suffers. In fact, being in at least one good relationship appears to be a prerequisite of physical and psychological well-being.9 For example, maximum-security prisons used to keep inmates locked alone in their cells for up to twenty-three hours each day. The feelings of isolation the inmates experienced resulted in their becoming restless, angry, violent, and potentially suicidal. When restrictions were loosened, however, and inmates were allowed out of their cells for hours each day, able to play sports and mingle and dine with others, their behavior and emotional

health improved.10

True or False 4. Interpersonal communication affects your health. True. Interpersonal communication is necessary for both physical and psychological well-being.

Interpersonal communication also enhances self-other understanding; through our interactions with others, we learn how different individuals affect us. In fact, we depend on interpersonal communication to develop our self-awareness and maintain our sense of self. To quote communication theorist Thomas Hora: “To understand oneself, one needs to be understood by another. To be understood by another, one needs to understand the other.”11

Because interpersonal communication is a fluid process that depends on constantly changing components, it offers myriad opportunities for self- other discovery. Different contexts help us figure out who likes or dislikes us and why, when and why to trust or distrust someone, what behaviors elicit the strongest reactions, under what conditions we have the power to influence another person, and whether we have the ability to resolve relational conflict.

IT FULFILLS SOCIAL FUNCTIONS

Through interpersonal communication we are able to begin and sustain relationships. Our interpersonal contacts fulfill our social needs to varying degrees. Although we vary greatly in the extent to which we experience these needs, according to psychologist William Schutz our relationships reflect the following in particular:

• Our need for affection—to express or receive fondness

• Our need for inclusion—to be included or include others as full partners

• Our need for control—to direct or exert influence over the self and others so that we feel we are able to deal with and manage our lives and environment.12

When we are in a relationship with someone whose needs complement or balance our own, each of us is able to have our needs met. When our needs are not complementary, however, we are more apt to experience relationship struggles or conflict. Do your experiences confirm this? (We explore the work of William Schutz in more depth in Chapter 12.)

Have you ever felt isolated when in a crowd?

Good interpersonal communication also allows us a glimpse into another person’s reality. For example, developing an interpersonal relationship with someone whose culture differs from our own broadens our own point of view. Our interpersonal styles may differ from each other’s, but we adapt to the sound, form, and content of their messages and pay attention to how members of different cultures feel about displaying affection, exerting control, defining roles, and meeting goals. While it may be easier to identify with and associate with those who are like us, coming from different cultures does not preclude our learning to share similar meanings.

Interpersonal communication similarly fulfills our need to be friended and

to friend others. (Notice how friend has also become a verb.) It helps alleviate feelings of isolation, fulfilling our desire to feel needed, loved, wanted, and capable. Because of this, interpersonal communication may increase our personal satisfaction, helping us feel more positive about ourselves.

IT FULFILLS INFORMATION FUNCTIONS

During interpersonal contacts, as we share information we reduce the amount of uncertainty in our lives. By taking in information we meet the need to acquire knowledge.

Information is not the same thing as communication. Just as more communication is not necessarily better communication, more information is not necessarily better information. Sometimes no information and no communication may be the best course. We can, after all, talk a problem or issue to death. Thus, just as there is a time to talk, there is a time to stop talking and listen.

We use interpersonal communication to influence others. Are you aware when others attempt to influence you?

IT FULFILLS INFLUENCE FUNCTIONS

We use interpersonal communication to influence others—sometimes subtly and sometimes overtly. As we exercise influence, our need to gain compliance is met. Interpersonal communicators are both the users of and targets of persuasion.

As we observed earlier in this chapter, interpersonal communication is often goal directed. And even though we may not be conscious of it, we often use strategic communication to achieve our goals. We methodically plan how to get what we want. We seek contact with and advice from others whom we believe can help us. This is not to say that human beings are naturally manipulative or deceptive, as neither of these practices supports the interdependent and transactional nature of interpersonal communication.13 Communication is not something we do to others or have done to us. It is a mutually reinforcing activity we engage in together. How we interact is a two-way affair. We mutually influence each other. We are both affected by what each of us does and says.

How we think about interpersonal communication has evolved from a linear process in which one receiver influences another to an interactional process in which communication by each person precipitates a reaction in the other person to a mutually interactive transaction deriving meaning from the simultaneous sharing of ideas and feelings. From a transaction perspective, no single cause explains how you interpret or make sense of experience. Communication is more complex than that.

TRY THIS: Functions in Action Consider three conversations: one you recently had with a significant other, one between you and a friend, and one between you and an acquaintance or coworker you usually don’t get together with outside of work. Explain which interpersonal communication functions each interaction fulfilled: psychological, social, information, and/or influence. Be specific in describing and assessing how each interaction illustrates the function(s) you identify.

UNDERSTANDING INTERPERSONAL CONTACT: CHARACTERISTICS, PATTERNS, AND AXIOMS OF COMMUNICATION

As we see, every interpersonal communication contact shares certain essential elements and serves one or more functions. Every interpersonal communication contact also shares the following:

1. Key characteristics: descriptions of the communication that are common across different situations or contexts

2. Core communication principles: identifiable behavioral patterns and motivations

3. Axioms: the fundamental rules by which communication may be analyzed or explained.

FIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

Let’s first explore the noteworthy characteristics of interpersonal communication (see Table 1.4).

TABLE 1.4 Characteristics of Interpersonal Communication

Communication Is ...

In Other Words ...

A dynamic process It is ongoing, continuous, and in a constant state of flux.

Unrepeatable and It is unique.

irreversible

Learned We find out over time what works for us and what does not work if we remain conscious of the communication.

Characterized by wholeness and nonsummativity

It operates as a complete entity, much like a team functions.

Interpersonal Communication Is a Dynamic Process. By dynamic process we mean that interpersonal communication is ongoing or continuous, and in a constant state of flux. All the components continually interact with and affect each other. They are interdependent or interconnected. They depend on and influence one another. What one person says or does influences what the other person says or does. Every interpersonal encounter is a point of arrival from a previous encounter and a point of departure for a future encounter.

Interpersonal Communication Is Unrepeatable. Every interpersonal contact is unique. It has never happened in just that way before, and it will never happen in just that way again. Why? Because every contact changes us in some way and, as a result, can never be exactly repeated or replicated. Try as we might, we can never recapture exactly the same feelings, thoughts, or relationship that existed at a specific point in time. We are no longer exactly the same persons we were before we made contact.

Interpersonal Communication Is Irreversible. In addition to being unrepeatable, interpersonal communication is irreversible. Once we have said or done something to another, we cannot erase its impact. After exhibiting behavior, we cannot simply say, “Forget that!” and substitute a better or more appropriate behavior in its place (though we sometimes would like to try). We cannot rewind or restart communication as we can a TV program recorded on a DVR. We cannot unhear words, unsee sights, or undo acts. They are irretrievable. Presenting a new stimulus does not change the previous stimulus. It merely becomes part of a behavioral sequence.

We Cannot Uncommunicate Online Either. For one thing, a written

message provides evidence of the message sent. E-mails are virtually impossible to erase. They remain on servers and workstations, even after we have “deleted” them. So do all entries made on social media sites such as Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and LinkedIn. You may try to soften their effects, but you cannot reverse their existence any more than you can try to squeeze toothpaste back into a tube. In fact, the online service Social Intelligence can provide a dossier on every faux pas, every sarcastic comment, every remark containing overt or implied prejudice, and every lewd personal picture you have posted. The Web is forever.14

Once sent, it is virtually impossible to take back an e-mail message.

Interpersonal Communication Is Learned. Over time we learn what works for us in an interpersonal relationship and what does not. We can hinder our communication with another person if we remain unconscious of how we affect him or her, and vice versa. Part of the art of interpersonal communication involves recognizing how our words and actions affect others, how their words and actions affect us, and then, based on our observations, making the necessary adjustments.

Dynamic process: A process that is ongoing, continuous, and in a state of constant flux.

Interpersonal Communication Is Characterized by Wholeness and Nonsummativity. When we say that the interpersonal relationship is characterized by “wholeness,” we are saying that it operates as a complete

entity. We consider more than the individuals who are in the relationship; we look at the unique ways in which the persons involved influence each other. When we say that interpersonal communication is characterized by “nonsummativity,” we are saying that the whole is more than the sum of its parts; interpersonal communication is about more than just its participants per se. We cannot understand a couple by looking at only one- half of the partnership. We cannot understand a family by looking at only one of the children. The nature of the relationship must be examined. The “us” must be explored. The relationship takes on a quality that we cannot understand merely by possessing information about its parts. The system as a whole is simply different from the sum of its parts.15

INTERPERSONAL PATTERNS

Interpersonal communication involves understanding patterns of behavior, predicting what others will do and say, and providing reasons for their actions as well as our own.16 Thus, understanding the patterns of behavior an individual displays, not just a single behavior, provides the basis for understanding the person’s interpersonal communication. In other words, a single isolated behavior is not what we need to focus on; rather, we must take into account the entire behavioral sequence.

Interpersonal communication involves not only interpreting but also predicting and accounting for another person’s behavior. If we are able to distinguish individuals from a general group, then we recognize their uniqueness and are able to know and understand them. For example, were we to interact with a number of different professors over time yet treat all of them alike, or were we to date a number of different men or women yet not distinguish one date from another, we would not be very effective interpersonal communicators. To the extent that we can predict the behavior of a particular teacher or a specific romantic interest, and account for that behavior, what we term reasoned sense making, we can understand that individual more than we might understand other professors, or other dates.

We also reason retrospectively. Retrospective sense making means making sense of our own behavior once it has occurred. We interpret our own actions in light of the goals we have or have not attained. We look back on interactions and continually redefine our relationships, which is our way of making sense of them. As our interactions with another person

100

progress, the events of our relationship increase in number, and, as a result, the relationship and how we feel about it changes.

Reasoned sense making: The ability to predict and account for the behavior of a particular person.

Retrospective sense making: The ability to make sense of one’s own behavior once it has occurred.

Axioms of communication: A paradigm of universally accepted principles used for understanding communication.

FIVE COMMUNICATION AXIOMS

Identified in a classic study by Paul Watzlawick, Janet Beavin, and Don Jackson, there are five axioms of communication, or universally accepted principles, that enable us to understand interpersonal interactions more fully.17 (See Table 1.5.)

TABLE 1.5 Axioms of Communication

1. You cannot not communicate.

2. Interactions have content and relationship dimensions.

3. Interactions are defined by how they are punctuated.

4. Messages are verbal symbols and nonverbal cues.

5. Exchanges are symmetrical or complementary.

Axiom 1: You Cannot Not Communicate. Behavior has no opposite. We cannot voluntarily stop behaving. Even if we consciously decide not to respond, even if we do our utmost not to move a muscle or utter a sound, our stillness and silence are responses. As such, they have message value, influence others, and therefore communicate. No matter how hard we try, we cannot not communicate. Our behavior communicates whenever it is given meaning.

Axiom 2: Every Interaction Has a Content and Relationship Dimension. The content dimension of a message involves the expected

101

response, and the relationship dimension indicates how the message is to be interpreted and reveals what one party to the interaction thinks of the other. For example, a husband says to his spouse, “Get over here right now.” The content level, or expected response, is that the spouse will approach immediately. But the message can be delivered in a number of ways: as an order, a plea, a flirtation, or an expression of sexual desire, for example. Each manner of delivery suggests a different kind of relationship. It is through such variations that we offer clues to another person regarding how we see ourselves in relationship to that person.

Axiom 3: Every Interaction is Defined by How It Is Punctuated. Though we often feel as if we can label the beginning and the end of an interaction, pointing to a traceable cause for a specific reaction, in actuality communication has no definitive starting or finishing line. It is difficult to determine exactly what is stimulus and what is response. Consider this example:

A woman is usually late getting home from work. When she does get home, she often finds her partner asleep. Both are angry. The woman might observe that she works so much because all her partner does is sleep. The partner might say that all he does is sleep because she’s never home.

Neither of them interprets their own behavior as responses to the behavior of the other. For the woman, her partner’s behavior is the stimulus and hers is the response; he causes her behavior. For the partner, it’s just the opposite. Whereas he sees the sequence as going from working to sleeping, she sees it as going from sleeping to working; which is it, really?

We all segment experience somewhat differently because we each see it differently. We call the dividing of communication into segments punctuation. The way a communication is punctuated usually benefits the person doing the punctuating. Punctuation also reveals how an individual interprets a situation and offers insight into the nature of an interpersonal conflict in particular and the interpersonal relationship in general.

Axiom 4: Messages Consist of Verbal Symbols and Nonverbal Cues. During face-to-face or online interactions, we emit two kinds of messages: discrete, digital verbal symbols or words and continuous, analogic, nonverbal cues. Language is digital because it is composed of discrete

102

words that are coded with meaning, while nonverbal communication is analogic because it is continuous behavior without a beginning or end. According to Watzlawick, Beavin, and Jackson, the content of a message is more apt to be carried via the verbal or digital system, whereas the relationship level of the message is typically carried via the nonverbal or analogic system. Although we can usually control what we say or write, it is much more difficult to control the nonverbal cues we emit. Thus, we may not speak angry words, but our face may betray our rage. As a result, it is easy to lie with words but hard to produce behavior that supports the lie. Nonverbal behavior often gives us away.

Axiom 5: Interactions Are Either Symmetrical or Complementary. Watzlawick, Beavin, and Jackson categorize relationships as either symmetrical or complementary, terms not descriptive of “good” and “bad,” but simply two types of relationships into which interactions can be divided. In a symmetrical relationship, the parties mirror each other’s behavior. If one person is solicitous, the other is as well. If one person whines, the other does also. In contrast, in a complementary relationship, the parties engage in opposite behaviors, with the behavior of one precipitating the behavior of the other. If one person is docile, the other is assertive. If one leads, the other follows. Complementary relationships maximize the differences between the parties, including the different positions each holds in the relationship at a point in time.

Neither symmetrical nor complementary relationships are trouble-free. In a symmetrical relationship the parties run the risk of experiencing “symmetrical escalation.” Believing they are “equal,” both persons might assert, for example, the right to exert control. Once this starts, each may feel compelled to engage in battle to demonstrate his or her equality. And so a status struggle begins. The main danger facing persons in a symmetrical relationship is a runaway sense of competitiveness.

In contrast, those who share complementary relationships may face a problem called “rigid complementarity”—extreme rigidity. This problem surfaces when one party begins to feel that control is automatically his or hers. For example, an overly protective mother who cannot accept that her child is grown, an employer unable to share leadership, and a teacher who cannot learn from others—all illustrate the rigidness that can develop in people who become locked into self-perpetuating, unchanging, unhealthy patterns of behavior. Switches in power are natural; we need to be

103

prepared for them.

Taken together with the characteristics and principles of communication, the five axioms of communication provide additional knowledge as we seek to enhance our understanding and increase the effectiveness of our interpersonal contacts. Now let’s widen our focus.

THE IMPACT OF DIVERSITY AND CULTURE

Because U.S. society is multicultural in makeup and becoming increasingly so, and because cultural values help shape our acceptance of and preference for specific communication styles, it is important that we understand the role cultural prescriptions play in our interpersonal contacts. Here’s the challenge: Even though the United States is the most demographically diverse country in the world, how regularly do you take cultural differences into account in your person-to-person interactions?

Complementary relationship: A relationship based on difference in which the parties engage in opposite behaviors.

Cultural awareness: The ability to understand the role cultural prescriptions play in shaping communication.

DIVERSITY AND COMMUNICATION STYLE

Developing cultural awareness, the ability to understand the role that cultural prescriptions play in shaping communication, is an asset. Why? Because people we once considered strangers are now our friends and coworkers, and intercultural ignorance too frequently slows our ability to create meaningful interpersonal relationships with people who are culturally different from us.

Whenever cultural variability influences the nature and outcomes of interpersonal communication, culture is having an effect. Learning about other cultures, including their systems of knowledge, belief, values, customs, and artifacts, facilitates person-to-person interaction. Every culture can be subdivided into cocultures consisting of members of the same general culture who differ in some ethnic or sociological way from the dominant culture. In the United States, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Japanese Americans, Korean Americans, the physically

104

challenged, homosexuals, and the elderly are examples of cocultural groups. To engage in effective interpersonal communication with members of these and other groups it is important to enhance your knowledge of the norms and rules that characterize their interactions. Remember, the lessons taught to you by your culture are not necessarily the lessons others have been taught by theirs.

Among culture’s lessons are how to say hello and goodbye, when to speak and when to remain silent, how to behave when angry, how much eye contact to make when interacting, and how much gesturing and touching is appropriate. If cultural anthropologist Edward T. Hall is right in saying that culture is communication and communication is culture, then culture guides behavior, and we must make the effort to understand someone’s culture if we are to understand the person.18

Becoming culturally aware increases communication competence.

Determining the answers to the following questions when interacting with someone whose cultural background differs from yours can improve your communication:

1. How do this person’s feelings about socialization differ from mine? 2. How does his or her concept of self differ from mine? 3. To what extent do our attitudes, values, and thinking processes differ? 4. To what degree is he or she more or less competitive than me? 5. In what ways does his or her use of nonverbal cues differ from mine?

ORIENTATION AND CULTURAL CONTEXT

105

While an array of variables distinguish one culture from another, the two we focus on here are (1) individual and collective orientation and (2) high- context and low-context communication.19

Individual and Collective Orientation. Cultures that are more individualistic in nature, such as those of the United States, Canada, Great Britain, and Germany, stress individual goals. In contrast, cultures more collectivistic in nature, such as those represented by many Muslim, African, Asian, and Latin American countries, stress group goals.20 Whereas individualist cultures nurture individual initiative and achievement, collectivist cultures nurture loyalty to a group. In an individualist culture, you are responsible for yourself and maybe your immediate family (the “I” is dominant); in a collectivist culture, you are responsible for the entire group (the “we” is dominant). Likewise, whereas individualist cultures promote competition, collectivist ones stress cooperation.

High-Context and Low-Context Communication. Cultures are also distinguished from each other by their use of high- or low-context communication. High-context cultures are tradition bound; cultural traditions guide members’ interactions, causing them to appear to outsiders as overly polite and indirect in relationships. Members of low-context cultures, in contrast, usually exhibit a more direct communication style, one that is verbally explicit. Members of Western cultures tend to use low- context communication, whereas members of Asian and other Eastern cultures typically use high-context communication, preferring to interact indirectly and leaving much unstated.21 Because they also place a premium on face-saving behavior, members of high-context cultures are much less confrontational as well. Preferring to preserve harmony, they seek to avoid arguing for fear the other person might lose face. For similar reasons, members of high-context cultures are also reluctant to say “no” directly to another person. Thus, members of low-context cultures may have difficulty deciding when and if the “yes” of a member of a high- context culture really means yes.

THE IMPACT OF GENDER

Culture also shapes gender, and gender shapes communication.22 Socially accepted variations in the definitions and views of masculinity and

106

femininity, gender differences, are taught to us as we grow up. As historian Elizabeth Fox-Genovese writes, “To be an ‘I’ at all means to be gendered.”23

GENDER AND COMMUNICATION STYLE

Gender is a social creation that imposes a sense of social order by reflecting the societal characteristics associated with the biological categories of male and female. Subtly or overtly, we are pressured to conform to social norms, encouraged to learn accepted interaction scripts, and usually develop preferences for using different communication styles. Though attitudes have evolved, in U.S. society, for example, women still are generally expected to be more nurturing, sensitive to others’ needs, and emotional than men, whereas men are expected to be more independent, assertive, and emotionally restrained than women. Some families even persist in dividing responsibilities along gendered lines, assigning more physically demanding outdoor chores to males while expecting females to clean the home’s interior, cook, and care for other family members, including younger siblings and aging parents. Hospitals often wrap baby girls in pink blankets and baby boys in blue blankets. Girls and boys similarly are provided with different kinds of toys—perhaps dolls for girls and action figures for boys. Even schools have been criticized for encouraging students to pursue different curricula depending on their gender. So from the delivery room to the home, to the school, and on to romantic relationships and career paths, we see gender helping to shape lifestyle. However, as we become more conscious of arbitrarily created gendered meanings, we are able to work to reconstruct and broaden our understanding of what is appropriate behavior and what we accept as “normal.”

Gender: The socially constructed roles and behaviors that the members of a given society believe to be appropriate for men and women.

While we all express gender through behavior that we believe is normal for a member of our sex, what we define as normal changes with time. By identifying how arbitrarily created gendered constructions, or conventions, affect interpersonal communication and our relationships, we take a step toward understanding what we hope for when it comes to our interpersonal lives. Do you see your options as unlimited? What tasks do you feel free to perform? What limits, if any, do you believe should be placed on the role

107

gender plays in our social, professional, and family relationships? While all societies promote gender ideologies that specify appropriate behaviors for males and females, what should you do if you believe a gendered construction is privileging, disadvantaging, empowering, or paralyzing you or a partner?

As you proceed through this text, you will have numerous opportunities to answer questions like these. After all, gender is a relational construct that we clarify through person-to-person interaction.

THE IMPACT OF MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGY

“The medium is the message.” “The medium is the massage.” We can trace both of these sayings to the musings of the late media critic and communication theorist Marshall McLuhan. According to McLuhan, the channels of communication affect both the sending and the receiving of messages. The same words convey different messages depending on whether they are sent using face-to-face interaction, print, a cell phone, a video, or a podcast. The medium changes things, altering the message, massaging its contents. For the same reason, ending a relationship in person is different from terminating it via a text. It is now almost five decades since McLuhan predicted that the introduction of new technologies would transform our world into a mobile global village.24 His prophecy has come true. Technology makes it increasingly possible for us to watch and listen to, introduce ourselves to, and have continuing contact with individuals across the country and around the world without ever leaving our homes. Technology is altering our sense of self, our social norms, our views of reality, our images of success and failure, our happiness, our interpersonal options, and the communication rules we adhere to.

108

According to media guru Marshall McLuhan, the medium is both message and massage.

Years ago, Apple’s Steve Jobs observed that computers are really personal and should be renamed “inter-personal computers.”25Today we use them, tablets, or smartphones to log on to Facebook, LinkedIn, or Foursquare so we can connect with others. In the year 2000, the average person spent 2.7 hours a week online. In 2010, that number jumped to 18 hours a week.26 Now, we live our lives plus sometimes a “second life,” enacting a fantasy or alternative life online, perhaps in Farmville, or sharing our interests on Pinterest or other sites. However, when we form a relationship online, we are likely to idealize and create heightened expectations for it, expectations that might not be realized should we actually meet. In fact, online partners feel greater intimacy with and attraction for one another than when they actually meet one another face-to-face.27 Have any of your online relationships developed into flourishing off-line ones? To what do you attribute their success or failure?

109

TRY THIS: What’s Okay with You? What guidelines do you think people ought to follow when using electronically enhanced communication? For example, have you ever engaged in any of the behaviors identified in the chart below yourself? Would you become annoyed, insulted, or feel at risk if another person engaged in any of the identified behaviors? Use the chart to record your answers.

The behavior Exhibited the behavior myself

My reaction to another’s exhibiting the behavior

Texting while walking in the street

Texting another person while dining out with a friend

Answering a cell during a movie

Talking loudly on your cell on public transportation

Texting back in response to a missed call

Talking on a cell with one friend when out with someone who is talking on a cell to another friend

Not checking into foursquare when solicited

Tweeting about one friend to another

110

Accessing Facebook while watching TV with a significant other

1. What rules, if any, would you advise we adhere to when using digitally enhanced communication?

2. What makes certain uses of digitally enhanced communication either acceptable or unacceptable in your eyes?

3. How would you react if a rule important to you were violated?

In addition to broadening the network of people we communicate with, for those who experience communication apprehension when face-to-face with another person, technology makes it possible to connect without such fear. We can interact remotely or in person, be anonymous, someone else, or ourselves. If the choice were yours alone, would you opt to increase or decrease the number of your virtual interactions compared to those you experience face-to-face? Why?

As well as spending increased amounts of time online, we are also devoting more time to viewing and talking about reality and other programs. As a result, our mediated experiences are influencing our real- life experiences and relationships. Mediated reality is often sexier or more violent than real-life. Despite this, we sometimes try to apply what we learn from them to our own lives, only to end up disappointed. Our love affairs are rarely as poignant or as passionate as those in the media. Our friends are rarely as attractive, giving, or fun to be with as those we see depicted. Physicians and lawyers are rarely as successful treating or representing us as their fictional counterparts are. Somehow, real life falls short of the lives we encounter either online or via television and film.

111

Which of the two cartoon characters do you believe makes the stronger case and why?

A generation ago, parents used to cajole, “Turn off the TV.” Their plea has now changed to something like “Turn off the computer and come watch television.” Or are your parents as plugged into Facebook and other online sites as you are? Do you or they take the computer to bed as you once did a stuffed animal? The claims we make about Internet addiction are much like the claims people used to make about television being a plug-in drug.

Whether it is the television or a computer, a machine is altering your consciousness and the nature of your interpersonal interactions.28 And we all need to think about that. In coming chapters we will look at the extent to which it is personalizing or depersonalizing our contacts, fostering or impeding the development of what we call a community. Is it improving or harming your communication with friends and family members? When online, do you gravitate toward cliques of persons who share your interests, or do you seek to widen and diversify your interpersonal community?

True or False 5. Machines are altering the nature of interpersonal communication. True. Machines are transforming how we communicate with one another by increasing connection opportunities.

ON THE WAY TO GAINING COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE

Even though interpersonal communication is an inevitable part of life, few, if any, of us are as effective or as successful at it as we could be. Therefore, we invite you to treat this class as your interpersonal communication laboratory. Use the information you gain and the skills you

112

practice as guides when you interact with others. There is no such thing as being too good at interpersonal communication. Whatever your capabilities are right now, to help yourself become better at communicating interpersonally, promise yourself you will do the following.

ADD TO YOUR STOREHOUSE OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

Your chance of influencing your interpersonal encounters positively depends, at least to some extent, on your knowledge of how interpersonal relationships work. While our relationships vary significantly, with some being plagued by problems and others proceeding smoothly, one of our objectives in this book is to share with you a number of techniques you can use to enhance the quality of your relationships and the satisfaction you derive from them.

RECOGNIZE HOW YOUR RELATIONSHIPS AFFECT YOU

Every one of your relationships affects you in some way. Some influence your sense of others; some alter the quality of your life. Some add to your confidence; others diminish your belief in yourself. While healthy relationships enrich your life, unhealthy ones too often rob you of energy, leaving you demoralized or apathetic. Another goal of this course is to help you understand the complex ways in which interpersonal communication changes you and the complex forces at work during person-to-person contacts. If you understand the challenges you face, identify alternative modes of responding, and learn how to think about your relationships, then you will be better prepared to deal effectively with them.

113

Is the person you present online the same person you present face-to- face?

ANALYZE YOUR OPTIONS

The interpersonal communication choices you make have impacts on you and your partner. Rather than responding automatically, take time to think about your options. What happens in a relationship usually is not beyond your control. In most situations, you have freedom to respond in any number of ways. Every contact you engage in offers opportunities to improve it if you remain flexible and open. Another of our goals is to help you learn to take advantage of this.

INTERACT ETHICALLY, RESPECT DIVERSITY, AND THINK CRITICALLY ABOUT YOUR PERSON-TO-PERSON CONTACTS

Effective interpersonal communicators act ethically in their relationships, demonstrate their respect for diversity, and think critically about the interactions they share. Ethical communicators demonstrate the ability to adhere to standards of right and wrong. They follow appropriate interaction rules, treat other persons as they would like to be treated, and never knowingly harm someone else in an effort to achieve personal goals.

Interpersonal communicators who respect diversity understand culture’s

114

role in person-to-person interactions, tolerate difference and dissent, willingly interact with persons from a variety of backgrounds, demonstrate a decreased use of stereotypes to guide behavior, process experience from the viewpoints of others, avoid imposing their cultural values on other persons, and refrain from holding discriminatory attitudes.

Individuals who think critically about their relationships know that communication is complex, and they don’t know all there is to know. They are open-minded; reflect on others’ ideas rather than respond impulsively; open themselves to new ideas and new ways of perceiving; challenge themselves to reexamine their beliefs, values, and behaviors; and concern themselves with unstated assumptions in addition to overt discourse. They think things out, analyzing and evaluating outcomes, seeking to understand and remember what worked or didn’t, and creating opportunities for their own personal growth together with the personal growth of others.

REFLECT ON THIS: The Cell Effect

Researcher Noelle Chesley wanted to find out if the time people spent on cell-phones enhanced or detracted from their overall feelings of happiness. To answer the question, Chesley surveyed more than 1,200 adults, concluding that a correlation existed: the more time individuals spent on cell-phones the less happy and less satisfied they became with their family relationships. Chesley attributed this, at least in part, to the work lives of people spilling over into their personal lives and causing stress at home.

Consider these questions:

115

being paid to the person(s) with you?

2. Do you think Chesley would have found the same results if she had studied the time we spend on tablets or computers? Explain your answer.

3. What recommendations can you offer for alleviating such relationship stressors? For example, would you expect others to abide by rules specifying when to use cell phones or other digital tools?

SOURCE: Noelle Chesley, “Blurring Boundaries? Linking Technology Use, Spillover, Individual Distress, and Family Satisfaction.” Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 2005, p. 1237–1238.

PRACTICE AND APPLY SKILLS TO IMPROVE INTERPERSONAL PERFORMANCE

This text shares with you skills you can practice to enhance your interpersonal effectiveness. Commit to practicing them. How you present yourself, perceive others, use words and nonverbal cues, listen, progress in a relationship, overcome relational obstacles, demonstrate trust and trustworthiness, and handle your emotions all affect your interaction with friends, family members, coworkers, and health providers. The extent to which you practice and apply the skills we discuss will determine whether you add to your interpersonal behavioral repertoire, demonstrating your interpersonal versatility and resourcefulness.

How omnipresent is technology in your life? Could you live without it?

116

Would you want to?

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Sylvia and Khalil

“After he left my dorm, he texted me, ‘I’m sorry, it’s over.’ That’s all he said,” Sylvia told her roommate Justine. “How could he end things just like that? Why didn’t he talk to me when we were together? I thought everything was fine with us.” Sylvia and Khalil had been together for several months. They had met on campus at the beginning of the semester and had been seeing each other regularly. Sylvia had even invited Khalil to spend Thanksgiving with her at her parent’s. They had returned to campus after the holiday and then this happened. “What did I do to cause this?” Sylvia asked Justine. “Do you think he met someone else?” Sylvia was despondent. Questions raced through her mind. She tried to access Khalil’s Facebook page, but he had already defriended her, deleted her pictures, and changed his relationship status to single. She decided to text him back, asking, “What happened? What did I do?” Then she turned off her cell, afraid of what he would text back to her. Khalil was sitting in his off-campus apartment staring blankly at his iPad. He had just defriended Sylvia and changed his Facebook status. He didn’t feel good about it, but he told himself he had no choice. Now she was texting him. He didn’t want to read it. “How can I tell her truth?” he wondered. Sure, they had had some great times together— but that was until he went home with her for Thanksgiving dinner. Soon after entering Sylvia’s parents’ home, Khalil had begun to feel uncomfortable. Her folks were nice enough, but he sensed a certain amount of distance on their part.

117

By the time they had finished dinner, Khalil was certain that because he was Egyptian, Sylvia’s parents had reservations about him. They hadn’t done or said anything directly to him; he just had a feeling. Maybe he should have raised his concerns with Sylvia. But he told himself that ending things this way was easier. Was he right? Khalil just didn’t know. He turned off his cell.29

Demonstrate your understanding by answering these questions:

1. What do you think about the way Sylvia and Khalil handled their situation?

2. What does the behavior of each suggest about his or her communication weaknesses and strengths?

3. Would you have used texting and Facebook in the same way as Sylvia and/or Khalil? Explain your answer.

4. Given the current status of their relationship, what advice would you give each of them?

REVIEW THIS CHAPTER SUMMARY

1 Define interpersonal communication, distinguishing it from other types of communication. Interpersonal communication occurs between two people who form a dyad. Interpersonal communicators make personal contact, build a connection, and establish a relationship. The process of interpersonal communication is ongoing and ever changing, and occurs whenever we interact with another person, sharing responsibility for creating meaning (what we extract from the interaction) and managing our relationship (determining its nature).

2 Use a communication model to identify the essential elements and transactional nature of the interpersonal communication process. Every interpersonal interaction is transactional in nature, meaning it involves two people who simultaneously function as sender and receiver; it contains messages (the content of communication), channels

118

(the medium or media carrying the message), noise (anything interfering with the reception of a message), feedback (information returned to a message source in response to a message sent), context (the physical, psychological, temporal, and cultural setting for communication), and effect(s) (the emotional, physical, and/or cognitive influence of the communication).

3 Explain the functions that interpersonal communication serves. Interpersonal communication fulfills psychological functions by enhancing self-other understanding; social functions by meeting our needs for affection, inclusion, and control; information functions by promoting the sharing of knowledge and reduction of uncertainty; and influence functions by enabling us to use strategic communication to achieve goals.

4 Describe the characteristics, core principles, and axioms of interpersonal communication. Among interpersonal communication’s characteristics are that it is a dynamic process, unrepeatable and irreversible, learned, and noted for its wholeness and nonsummativity. Among the principles underlying interpersonal communication are the importance of using behavioral patterns and both reasoned and retrospective sense making to predict and interpret behavior. The following five axioms add to our understanding of interpersonal relationships: (1) You cannot not communicate; (2) every interaction has content and relationship dimensions; (3) every interaction is defined by how it is punctuated; (4) messages consist of verbal symbols and nonverbal cues; and (5) interactions are either symmetrical or complementary.

5 Describe how gender and culture affect interpersonal communication. Gender and cultural prescriptions shape interpersonal communication. Because of their potential to enhance or complicate interpersonal relations, we can demonstrate sensitivity and avoid misunderstandings by increasing our awareness of the culture and gender preferences of others and recognizing the importance of respecting and adjusting to differences.

6 Provide examples of how digital media are reshaping interpersonal contacts. Digital media have broadened our options for communicating interpersonally. They are altering our sense of self, social norms, and views of reality. We send an increasing number of texts, using our cell

119

phones more than ever before. Whether such options are personalizing or depersonalizing interaction is still open to debate.

7 Develop a plan to improve your interpersonal communication. Adding to your storehouse of knowledge about interpersonal communication, critically analyzing how your relationships affect you as well as the behavioral options open to you, committing to interacting ethically, respecting diversity, and thinking critically about person-to- person interactions, together with developing and practicing skills, will make you a more effective interpersonal partner.

CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING

1 Can you explain the different kinds of communication you use in a day and how these help meet your needs? (See pages 1–2 and 12–14; and Try This, page 18.)

2 Can you give examples of what makes communication interpersonal? (See pages 2–5.)

3 Can you name and define the elements and axioms at work during interpersonal communication by using them to analyze some of your recent communication exchanges? (See pages 20–22.)

4 Can you summarize how communicating online as opposed to face-to- face alters the nature of interpersonal communication? (See pages 25– 27; and Try This, page 4 and page 26.)

5 Can you write a paragraph describing the steps you will take to enhance your interpersonal skills? (See pages 27–29.)

CHECK YOUR SKILLS

1 Can you identify factors that distinguish your fulfilling and unfulfilling

120

relationships? (See pages 2–4; and Try This, page 8.)

2 Can you determine when someone is responding to you personally as opposed to impersonally? (See pages 6–8.)

3 Can you use both feedback and feedforward to improve communication? (See pages 10–11.)

4 Can you use a transactional model of interpersonal communication to analyze an interpersonal communication exchange? (See page 13; and Try This, page 15.)

5 Can you provide examples of how one of your relationships fulfills your needs? (See Try This, page 18.)

6 Can you illustrate how the axioms of communication make themselves visible in your relationships? (See pages 20–22.)

7 Can you use the questions on page 23 to facilitate communication with a person whose culture differs from your own? (See page 23.)

8 Can you identify the gendered messages communicated to you by your family? (See pages 24–25.)

9 Can you apply your understanding of interpersonal communication when engaging in electronically enhanced communication? (See Try This, page 26; and Reflect on This, page 29.)

10 Can you use your skills to identify and respond to relationship challenges? (See The Case of Sylvia and Khalil, page 30.)

KEY TERMS

Communication 2

Intrapersonal communication 3

Interpersonal communication 3

Dyad 3

121

Interpersonal competence 4

Role duality 8

Messages 8

Channel 9

Noise 9

Feedback 10

Positive feedback 10

Negative feedback 10

Internal feedback 11

External feedback 11

Low-monitored feedback 11

High-monitored feedback 11

Feedforward 11

Phatic communication 11

Context 11

Effect 12

Linear or unidirectional model 12

Interaction model 13

Transactional model 14

Dynamic process 19

Reasoned sense making 20

Retrospective sense making 20

122

Axioms of communication 20

Complementary relationship 22

Cultural awareness 22

Gender 24

STUDENT STUDY SITE

Visit the student study site at www.sagepub.com/gambleic to access the following materials:

• SAGE Journal Articles

• Videos

• Web Resources

• eFlashcards

• Web Quizzes

• Study Questions

123

2Chapter

Know thyself.

–Socrates

THE IMPACT OF SELF-CONCEPT LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this chapter, you should be able to demonstrate

124

mastery of the following learning outcomes:

1. Define self-concept, distinguishing it from the self. 2. Explain reflected appraisal theory, social comparison theory, and

confirmation, rejection, and disconfirmation, using them to discuss the role you and others play in shaping the self-concept.

3. Define self-fulfilling prophecy and distinguish between positive and negative Pygmalions.

4. Explain the influence that cultural diversity and gender have on self- concept.

5. Describe how media and technology affect self-concept.

6. Identify how you can change and strengthen your self-concept.

he feature film The Social Network presents a fictional characterization of the real Mark Zuckerberg, the entrepreneur who created Facebook. As one writer observed, of significance is the fact that Zuckerberg created Facebook, and not Footbook or

Elbowbook.1 By starting Facebook, Zuckerberg acted on the belief that it is human for people to want to know what is going on. And we have proven Zuckerberg right. If you are over twelve years of age, you likely are among the more than half of all Americans who use Facebook.

What motivates our participation in Facebook? A deep interest in each other, and a desire to be noticed!

We are not just Facebook’s users, however. We are also Facebook’s products. We log on to Facebook, post photos that display ourselves as attractively or enticingly as possible, and update our lives for others to share by the minute if we’re obsessed, by the hour if we’re driven, and by the day if we’re typical users.

What motivates our participation in Facebook? A deep interest in each other and a desire to be noticed. We feel the need to tell about a new shirt, car, promotion, hairstyle, significant other, or status change. Facebook capitalizes on our longing for connection and attention. Zuckerberg understands that we want others to know about us. He understands that showing our face helps us validate our existence—and our concept of self.2

125

WHAT DO YOU KNOW?

Before continuing your reading of this chapter, which of the following five statements do you believe to be true and which do you believe to be false?

1. People with high self-esteem are less likely to be bullies.

T F

2. Your perceived self is the one others see. T F

3. Engaging in face-work improves your looks. T F

4. Positive expectations have no impact on performance.

T F

5. Childhood experiences influence our ideas about gender.

T F

Read the chapter to discover if you’re right or if you’ve made any erroneous assumptions.

Who are you? What do you think of yourself? Do you consider your relationship with yourself to be a good one? When you evaluate yourself, do you characteristically give yourself a “thumbs-up” or a “thumbs- down”? This chapter offers you the opportunity to develop self-awareness by reflecting on and monitoring your own behavior. Use this information to explore the nature of the self; to analyze how culture gender, media, and technology influence its development; and to examine how the

126

intrapersonal level of communication (the individual level, the communicating you do with yourself) affects the choices you make, your behavior, and your relationships.

How you see yourself affects your relationships with others.

The poet-philosopher Alan Watts noted, “Trying to define yourself is like trying to bite your own teeth.”3 Exactly how confident are you that you really know yourself? And how willing are you to try to get to know yourself better?

Who you think you are and how you think about yourself in relationship to others influences every one of your interpersonal contacts. What you think of yourself is your baseline, your starting point for communication.

THE SELF-CONCEPT: YOUR ANSWER TO WHO YOU ARE

Where does self-concept come from? While we are not born with a self- concept, over time we certainly develop one. The day a child first says “me,” the day she recognizes herself as separate from her surroundings, her life begins to change as she strives to fit into the world as she sees it. In short order, our concept of self—that relatively stable set of perceptions each of us attributes to ourselves—becomes our most important possession.

Beginning in childhood, the self-concept is composed of everything we think and feel about ourselves. It is the perceived self—our self-identity— the image we form of ourselves. In fact, self-concept has two key

127

components: self-image and self-esteem (see Table 2.1). Self-image is the mental picture you have of yourself—it sums up the kind of person you think you are. It is a composite of the roles you claim and the attitudes and beliefs you use to describe who and what you are to others, and your understanding of how others see you. Self-esteem is your self-evaluation —your estimation of your self-worth. In many ways it is an indication of how much you like and value yourself, including your feelings, positive and negative, about your abilities, character, and feelings.

With this as background, it becomes apparent that self-concept affects behavior, including what we think possible. As a result, it is important to use every opportunity to think carefully about self-concept.

Self-awareness: Personal reflection on and monitoring of one’s own behavior.

Self-concept: The relatively stable set of perceptions one attributes to oneself.

Self-esteem: One’s appraisal of one’s own self-worth.

Self-image: The mental picture one has of oneself.

TABLE 2.1 Looking at Yourself

Self-concept Everything you think and know about yourself

Self-image Your mental picture of you

Self-esteem Your estimation of your self-worth

How you complete the sentences in the “Who Are You?” “Try This” box on page 38, and the categories into which your answers can be grouped, offers clues to your self-concept, including your self-image and self- esteem. For example, you might conceive of yourself in reference to your gender (male or female), religion or spirituality (Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish, Christian, nonbeliever), race (African American, Hispanic, Asian), nationality (U.S. citizen, Canadian, Chinese), physical attributes (tall, stout), roles (spouse, daughter, sibling, employee), attitudes and emotions (optimistic, dejected, personable), mental abilities (academically challenged, gifited), or talents (musically or artistically proficient). The words you use to express your self-perceptions reveal what you think you are like. In many ways, your answers represent a construct that you have

128

built to make sense of who you are. Remember, however, that the self- concept is not necessarily the same as the self.

ANALYZE THIS: The Clown

As you read the following poem by Teri Gamble, consider these questions: What do you think is the significance of the clown’s omnipresent rainbow smile? Like the poem’s subject, do you ever “play” to people around you? Like the clown, do you ever wonder who you really are?

The rubber man in the spotlight

Propels himself

Beyond the reach

Of reality.

Midway between today and tomorrow

He pauses

Suspended in his reverie by the crowd.

129

The rubber man in the spotlight

Warmed by laughter

Finds a face

To play to.

Dancing upon an ever-turning spindle

He plays to another

And another, and another.

The rubber man in the spotlight

Sweeps up the dreams

That remind him

Of yesterday.

Then tumbling out of the ring

His face frozen in a rainbow smile

He wonders who he is.

HOW ARE THE SELF AND SELF-CONCEPT RELATED?

According to industrial psychologist William Haney, the self and the self- concept differ from each other in a number of ways. First, the self is very fluid and in a state of constant change, whereas the self-concept is more highly structured and difficult to change (see Figure 2.1). Second, a portion of the self-concept may not actually be included in the self; this area represents the part of ourselves that we invent. Third, there is much more to the self than is included within the self-concept; this area represents our untapped potential. For example, you may think of yourself as friendly and outgoing, while others see you as snobbish and reserved. You may have the potential to become a leader, but because of your inability to convince others that you would like to work with them, you might not have the opportunity to demonstrate this talent.

130

TRY THIS: Who Are You? Begin the exploration of your self-concept by answering the following question: Who am I? How many answers can you give? Complete the sentences below with the many different ways you view yourself.

I am ___________________________.

There are many ways to complete the sentences. For example, did you give information about personal traits, such as, “I am spiritual,” “I am attractive,” or “I am friendly”? Did you describe your social identity, such as “I am a Christian” or “I am Chinese”?

Taken together, your answers describe the elements or specific beliefs that constitute your self-concept. Look back at your answers. What do they reveal regarding how you Define yourself? What roles do you see yourself playing? How do you Define yourself socially? As you completed the sentences, how did social comparisons influence what you wrote? In what ways, if any, did your past successes and failures as well as other people’s judgments play a part in determining your responses?

To put it another way, the self-concept is a “map” that we create to chart the “territory” that is the self.4 Our map or mental picture is, at least in part, a result of our interpretations of the messages others send us. As such, it may be accurate or inaccurate, positive or negative. The self-concept is

131

depicted in Figure 2.1 as a rigid, geometric design to indicate that we like to make sense to ourselves. Experiencing uncertainty about the self is not a comfortable state for us, and so we work to develop consistency in the way we perceive ourselves.

Do you see yourself as you are or as you think you are?

HOW ACCURATE IS THE SELF-CONCEPT?

Although change is a constant in life, the thirst for constancy causes us to cling to outdated self-notions even in the face of evidence that renders these notions obsolete. Instead of revising our self-concepts to conform to new information, we do our best to acquire information that confirms what we already believe is true. Our reluctance to let go of set ideas allows outmoded notions about the self to persist. It is understandable that we might resist changing an inaccurate self-concept when the new information available to us is negative, because our self-concept could become more negative. For example, this could happen when we are no longer considered to be as bright or hardworking as we once were. It is hard to comprehend, however, why we similarly resist changing when the information is positive and would enhance our self-concept, such as when we are no longer perceived to be gawky or unfriendly. By rejecting such information, we deny ourselves a chance for growth and self-renewal. Defending an unrealistic negative or positive self-concept keeps us from making efforts to redefine ourselves. Whether that redefinition would result in a more positive or a more negative picture of who we are does not matter; our cognitive conservatism keeps us from seeing the real need for

132

change and allows us to continue deluding ourselves. Refuting new information that could lead us to change only limits us and obscures our view of how others see us. Conducting a reality check is necessary to validate or invalidate who we think we are. Have you conducted one recently? What did you discover?

Figure 2.1 The Self and the Self-Concept

Thus, as we go through life, each of us builds a self-concept that includes feelings of self-worth. The questions each of us must answer include the following: What is my feeling of self-worth? Why? What, if anything, do I want to do about how I feel about myself?

SELF-ESTEEM: ASSESSING SELF-WORTH

When we feel good about our achievements, we also tend to value and feel good about ourselves. Self-esteem, our positive or negative evaluation of our self-concept or sense of personal worth, is important because it can nurture and feed success or make succeeding more difficult. When we achieve or acquire new competencies, our self-esteem grows. In other words, we build self-esteem when we overcome obstacles, acquire specific skills or achievements, or are given increased responsibilities. Feeling good about the self and what we are capable of contributes to our performing well.

Since self-esteem is a measure of the value we place on ourselves, we carry it with us from one interpersonal interaction to another. What is more, we relay our level of self-esteem to others by how we interact with them.

HIGH VERSUS LOW SELF-ESTEEM

People with high self-esteem differ from those with low self-esteem in

133

communication style. They tend to display different eye contact, posture, and expression. Think about your friendly and romantic relationships. How does your opinion of your self-worth affect them?

True or False 1. People with high self-esteem are less likely to be bullies. False. High self-esteem may actually increase the tendency to bully.

Individuals with high self-esteem often think better of others, expect others to like them, evaluate their own performance favorably, perform well in front of others, work hard for those who demand it, feel comfortable interacting with superiors, and defend themselves against others’ negative appraisals. In contrast, individuals with low self-esteem often disapprove of others, expect others not to like them, evaluate themselves unfavorably, perform poorly in the presence of others, feel threated by their superiors, and find it hard to defend themselves against those who view them critically, equating criticism with rejection.5

When we perceive ourselves as failures, we are more likely to behave in ways that cause us to fail. When we perceive ourselves as successes, we are more apt to act confidently and in ways that bring about success. Every success we have helps build our self-esteem.

SELF-ESTEEM AND PERFORMANCE

When self-esteem is not connected to performance, it can be self- defeating. Feeling good about yourself when you have no reason to—that is, when you have added to neither your achievements nor your competencies—can lead to your developing a favorable self-appraisal that will not be matched by others’ views of you. Thus, when we talk about the importance of developing self-esteem, we are not talking about merely

134

praising or becoming a cheerleader for you. Rather, we are talking about opening yourself to opportunities that will help you develop your skills and abilities to their fullest potential.

And here’s a note of caution—research reveals that individuals with high self-esteem may pose more of a threat to others than persons with low self- esteem.6 In fact, research indicates that overemphasizing the importance of self-esteem in those who possess an unrealistically inflated self-appraisal can precipitate a culture of bullying characterized by persistent teasing, name-calling, or social exclusion. These findings have led some to argue that there needs to be a balance in the amount of praise given, to prevent inflated perceptions of self-importance in already self-centered individuals.7 Researchers advise that instead of fostering self-esteem, we should be fostering resilience, because resilience helps people recover from personal disappointments and defeats.8

Self-concept, self-worth, and self-esteem are all significant in their influence on how we communicate, but it is important to remember that when they are unrealistically inflated they can pose problems.

Belief in yourself shapes what is possible for you.

HOW OTHERS SHAPE OUR SELF-CONCEPT

135

While your experiences help shape your self-concept, your self-concept, in turn, helps shape your future experiences. How you see yourself in relation to others both guides and modifies your behavior. Probably, you act differently depending on the people you are with. You may act outgoing when in the presence of one friend but be intimidated by another. You may feel like a star in art class but inferior in chemistry, or vice versa. At any given moment, the nature of your self is affected by the nature of the situation in which you are interacting. And your interactions shape your view of your self. Consequently, your language, attitudes, and appearance are apt to change as you move from one set of conditions to another. In a way, you become different selves as you adapt to perceived changes (see Table 2.2).

WE REFLECT OTHERS’ APPRAISALS

More than a century ago, psychologist William James put it this way: “A man has as many social selves as there are individuals who recognize him and carry an image of him in their mind.”9 In similar fashion, in his reflected appraisal theory, psychologist Charles Cooley described the mirrorlike image we derive from our contacts with others and then project into our future experiences. In other words, we build a self-concept that reflects how we think others see us.10 Thus, as our assessments of situations and people change, we show different sides of ourselves. In fact, we use the views of others to develop our view of ourselves. According to reflected appraisal theory, the self we present is in large part based on the way others categorize us, the roles they expect us to play, and the behaviors or traits they expect us to exhibit. Cooley believed that by reflecting back to us who we are and how we come across, other people function as our mirrors. In fact, he coined the term “looking glass self” to represent the self that comes to us from others. For example, if others see you as a leader, capable, and outgoing, you may reflect their appraisals by viewing yourself in those ways. Of course, the roles we play and how we play them affect both how and with whom we communicate. They all influence the content, objectives, and frequency of our communication contacts.11

Reflected appraisal theory: A theory that states that the self a person presents is in large part based on the way others categorize the individual, the roles they expect him or her to play, and the behaviors or traits they expect him or her to exhibit.

136

TRY THIS: Feelings about Age and Physical Ability Feelings about aging may affect notions of self-worth. What messages about the self does our society send people as they age? What messages does it send to the physically challenged as compared to the able- bodied?

Consider these questions:

1. Picture yourself in the future. How do you think your view of yourself would change if you were thirty to forty years older? How do you imagine you would you feel about your appearance? How do you suppose you would feel about your potential to find a good job? How would you feel reporting to someone younger than yourself in your workplace?

2. How would your view of yourself change if instead of being able- bodied you suddenly had to use a wheelchair or vice versa?

3. What steps could you take to foster resilience in yourself when you are faced with forces that challenge your self-conceptions?

TABLE 2.2 Theories Reveal How Others Help Shape Us

Reflected appraisal theory

We build a self-concept that reflects how we think others see us.

Social comparison theory

We assess how we measure up against others.

Of course, not all messages others send us about how they see us carry the same weight. Those sent by our significant others and by individuals whose opinions we respect and trust normally exert more influence on us than do the opinions of strangers and mere acquaintances.

WE COMPARE OURSELVES WITH OTHERS

According to social comparison theory, we compare ourselves to others

137

to develop a feel for how our talents, abilities, and qualities measure up to theirs.12 In other words, in the effort to learn more about ourselves, we use others as measuring sticks, and then we evaluate ourselves in terms of how we think we measure up to them. As we compare ourselves to others, we form judgments of our skills, personal characteristics, and so on. We can, for example, decide whether we are the same as or different from others, whether we are better or worse, stronger or weaker, or more or less creative than those with whom we compare ourselves. Often, as we assess our similarities and differences, we also make decisions regarding the groups we fit into. Generally, we are most comfortable interacting with others we perceive to be like us.13

True or False 2. Your perceived self is the one others see. False. Your perceived self is the image you have of yourself, not the self you aspire to be.

Our self-esteem suffers if we continually feel we fall short when gauging ourselves in relation to others. When this happens, however, it may well be that we have chosen to compare ourselves to an inappropriate reference group. For example, if we compare our looks with those of a supermodel, our musical ability with those of an American Idol or Grammy winner, or our athletic prowess with that of an Olympian, we probably are making an unfair comparison and, as a result, will develop an unrealistic assessment of our appearance, talent, or ability. On the other hand, if we compare ourselves with members of a more appropriate reference group, we might be able to inflate rather than deflate our sense of self.

Social comparison theory: A theory affirming that individuals compare themselves to others to develop a feel for how their talents, abilities, and qualities measure up.

138

Our accuracy in assessing our self-concept and self-esteem depends on how successful we are at processing experience and receiving feedback. If we pay more attention to our successes than to our failures and more attention to positive reactions than to negative ones, we could end up overinflating our sense of self. On the other hand, if we pay more attention to our failures and give more credence to negative reactions, then our sense of self could deflate. In neither instance would our sense of self conform to reality. Rather than achieving congruence, our sense of self would be inconsistent with both real-life experiences and feedback.

WE HAVE PERCEIVED, IDEAL, AND EXPECTED SELVES

Each of us possesses a perceived self, an ideal or possible self, and an expected self. Sometimes, these views of the self can conflict with one another.

The perceived self is a reflection of your self-concept. It is the person you believe yourself to be when you are honest with yourself. Usually, there are some aspects of the perceived self that you wish to keep secret from others. For example, you might hesitate to let others know that you do not think you are good-looking or intelligent, that you are fixated on becoming wealthy, or that you are more concerned for your own welfare than theirs. Your ideal self is the self you would like to be. For example, you may want to be likable, and so you try to be a likable person. To accomplish this, you engage in impression management; you exercise control over your behavior in an effort to elicit the desired reaction.14 The possible self is the self you might become one day—the one you dream of becoming. You may, for instance, want to be a passionately loved self, an accomplished self, or a rich self. The expected self is the one others assume you will exhibit. It is based on behaviors they have seen you display in the past or stereotypes they hold.

True or False

139

3. Engaging in face-work improves your looks. False. Face-work is what you do to protect your self-image by reducing the negative aspects of yourself that are visible to others.

Goffman’s Dramaturgical Approach. Through his concept known as the dramaturgical approach to human interaction, Erving Goffman explains the role that the skillful enacting of impression management plays in person-to-person interaction.15 If we consider social interaction as a performance and the setting(s) in which interaction occurs as the stage, then the actors (the persons on the stage) play their parts to manage the impressions of others sharing the stage with them, so that they, the actors, may achieve their personal objectives. The more skillful the actors, the more effective they are at convincing others that they are knowledgeable and trustworthy and that they possess a charisma or dynamism that makes them attractive to others.

We can use several dramatic elements to make the best impression in any given scene. First, we can employ framing, specifically defining a scene or situation in a way that helps others interpret its meaning in the way we desire. We can also use scripting, the identification of each actor’s role in the scene. In effect, we convince others on the stage with us to play their roles. Of course, we use engaging dialogue—storytelling together with colorful and descriptive language and effective use of nonverbal cues—to guide the responses of the other players. Together, these elements underlie our performance.

When performing, we can also choose from among a number of techniques to encourage others to see us as we wish to be seen. For example, we may use exemplification, in which we serve as an example or act as a role model for others; promotion, in which we elucidate our personal skills and accomplishments and/or a particular vision; face-work, in which we take steps to protect our image by reducing the negative aspects of ourselves visible to others; or ingratiation, in which we employ techniques of agreement to make others believe us to be more attractive and likable and less threatening, harmful, or pernicious.

Describe a performance, face-to-face or online, that you or another person you know has enacted in an effort to come off as authentic. Were you or the other person successful? Were you or the other person authentic? How do you know?

140

Perceived self: A reflection of one’s self-concept; the person one believes oneself to be when one is being honest with oneself.

Ideal self: The self one would like to be.

Impression management: The exercising of control over one’s behaviors in an effort to make the desired impression.

Possible self: The self that one might become someday.

Expected self: The self that others assume one will exhibit.

Dramaturgical approach to human interaction: A theory, originated by Erving Goffman, that explains the role that the skillful enacting of impression management plays in person-to-person interaction.

Imagining a Future Self. According to Kelly McGonigal, author of The Willpower Instinct, a disconnection may exist between what we think of ourselves in the present and how we conceive of ourselves in the future— our “future self.”16 Brain scans reveal that the parts of our brain that are active when we think about others are different from the parts of the brain that are active when we think about ourselves. If, however, we feel too little connection to our future self, the same regions that activate when we think of others activate when we think of ourselves in the future. It is as if when we think of our future self we are seeing someone other than ourselves.

TRY THIS: The “Authentic” Self Authenticity is in! More and more of us believe we need to come across as authentic. For example, Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York, has been quoted as saying, “If you fear what people think of you, then you are not being authentic.” Anderson Cooper has said, “I’ve always tried to just be authentic and real.” Professional and personal development conferences feature panels on “How to Be Authentic.”

How do you define authenticity? What does the word mean to you? In your opinion can a person decide to act authentically and still be authentic? Do you know anyone who engages in “calculated authenticity,” consciously managing the impressions of him- or herself communicated to others? Such a person effectively turns human interaction into a staged performance reflective of the dramaturgical approach to human interaction described by sociologist Erving

141

Goffman.

Is this what we do on Facebook—brand ourselves in such a way that others find us authentic? Track your Facebook activity for a week. What messages do you think your posts send to others regarding your self- image and its authenticity?

SOURCE: See Stephanie Rosenbloom, “Authentic? Get Real,” New York Times, September 11, 2011, p. ST1, ST2.

Whether you do or do not connect with your future self can affect the decisions you make about your life. When we fail to pay attention to our future self, for example, we may make unethical decisions, such as leaking secrets that could destroy another person, causing ourselves problems both in the present and potentially down the road.17

We try to manage the impressions others form of us.

REACTIONS TO YOU: CONFIRMING, REJECTING, AND DISCONFIRMING RESPONSES

As we interact with others, how we feel about ourselves changes. Some people we interact with provide Confirmation of our opinion of ourselves, communicating with us in ways consistent with our own appraisal of ourselves. How they treat us during our interactions with them reflects the

142

way we think we are. For example, if you believe yourself to be intelligent, confirmers might reflect this by asking you to tutor them.

Others with whom we interact signal rejection of our self-appraisals by treating us in ways inconsistent with our sense of self—whether that is good or bad. For example, if you believe yourself to be hardworking but rejecters treat you as if you are lazy, over time their treatment of you might cause you to revise your picture of yourself.

Confirmation: A communication that tells another person that his or her self-image is affirmed.

Rejection: The negation of or disagreement with a self-appraisal.

Still others give us disconfirmation of, or show lack of regard for, our self-appraisals by sending us messages that tell us that as far as they are concerned, we are not even important enough for them to think about; in their eyes, we do not exist—we are irrelevant. Someone who disconfirms you ignores you and goes about her business as if you were not present. By treating other human beings like nonentities, consistent disconfirmers may eventually rob others of their sense of self, without which it becomes virtually impossible for them to relate to the world effectively.18

Thus, those around us help shape our self-concepts in both positive and negative ways. Virtually every interpersonal contact we share sends a message regarding our importance, our capabilities, and how others view both our potential and our inadequacies.19 (See Table 2.3.)

Disconfirmation: Communication that denies another person’s significance.

Self-efficacy: A positive belief in one’s own abilities, competence, and potential.

Self-fulfilling prophecy: A prediction or expectation that comes true simply because one acts as if it were true.

TABLE 2.3 The Self in Relationships

Confirming response Supports self-appraisal

Rejecting response Negates self-appraisal

143

Disconfirming response Robs the individual of a sense of self

THE SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY: THE INFLUENCE OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PYGMALIONS

Are you a pessimist or an optimist? Optimists believe they will succeed and persevere; pessimists tend to give up when confronted with challenges. Consequently, pessimists fail more frequently than do optimists, because one’s expectations of success often precipitate the expected level of success. Optimists are resilient; they have feelings of self-efficacy, possessing a positive belief in their abilities and competence, believing in their own possibilities.20 Unfortunately, the pessimist’s outlook and lack of resilience may lead to failure even as success is within reach. In many ways, both pessimists and optimists live out self-fulfilling prophecies.

A self-fulfilling prophecy occurs when we verbalize a prediction or internalize an expectation that comes true simply because we act as if it already were. Thus, our behavior increases the likelihood of an outcome. For example, have you ever been invited to a function you did not want to attend because you expected to be bored? Were you? If you were, to what extent is it possible that your prediction of boredom increased the likelihood of its occurrence?

There are five basic steps in the self-fulfilling prophecy cycle (see Figure 2.2).21 First, we form expectations of ourselves, others, or events—for example, “Monica won’t like me.” Second, we communicate the expectation by exhibiting various cues—“so I’ll keep my distance from Monica.” Third, others respond to the cues we send by adjusting their behavior to match our messages—Monica tells herself, “Ed is stuck up. I don’t even want to talk to him.” Fourth, the result is that our initial expectation comes true. Because we act as if our belief is true prior to its being confirmed, eventually it is confirmed—“It seems that, in fact, Monica does not like me.” Fifth, we attain closure as we complete the self- fulfilling prophecy cycle. The way we interpret the actions of others only strengthens our original belief—“Every time I see Monica, I am reminded that she does not like me.”

144

Pessimists and optimists approach life with divergent outlooks.

TRY THIS: Ups and Downs Because self-concept is a product of person-to-person interactions, other people can help shape our self-concept by confirming, rejecting, or disconfirming our sense of self.

1. Identify individuals who have confirmed, rejected, or disconfirmed you. Describe the short-and long-term effects of their actions on you.

2. Identify an instance when you confirmed, rejected, or disconfirmed someone else. Describe what you did or said and the effects of your words and actions on the other person and yourself.

3. Identify words and behavior you can use to express your positive regard for someone.

4. Explain how indifference, inattentiveness, and disqualification

145

influence conceptions of the self.

Figure 2.2 The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Story

A self-fulfilling prophecy can be either self-imposed or other-imposed. When your own expectations influence your behavior, the prophecy is self-imposed. When the expectations of others help direct your actions, the prophecy is other-imposed. Either way, we exhibit behavior that we or another person expects.

True or False 4. Positive expectations have no impact on performance. False. A positive Pygmalion is a person whose positive expectations

146

for you influence your behavior; the positive expectations you have for yourself act similarly and are known as the Galatea effect.

Among the most widely reported examples of the self-fulfilling prophecy is that used by psychologists Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson in their classic study Pygmalion in the Classroom, named for George Bernard Shaw’s play Pygmalion. Rosenthal and his associates informed a number of teachers that certain of their students were expected to “bloom”— that is, perform exceptionally well—during the academic years. The teachers were unaware that the student names had actually been selected randomly, and there was no true basis for predicting who would succeed. Despite this, the students who were singled out to bloom did so, improving their IQs and performing at higher levels than would otherwise have been expected.22 Apparently the teachers functioned as positive Pygmalions. Just as playwright Shaw’s character Henry Higgins transforms Cockney flower girl Eliza Doolittle into a duchess by showing her his belief that he can help her learn to speak and act like one, the teachers caused the students to live up to the labels placed on them. The teachers’ positive expectations positively influenced their treatment of the students. The teachers gave the “about to bloom” students extra positive verbal and nonverbal reinforcement, waited patiently for the students to respond if they hesitated, and did not give them negative feedback when they offered incorrect answers. Thus, the way the teachers behaved influenced the students’ perceptions of their own abilities. The “about to blooms” responded to the teachers’ prophecies by fulfilling them. Like Eliza Doolittle, the students acted like the persons others perceived them to be.

The Pygmalion effect, as this form of the self-fulfilling prophecy has come to be known, influences performance in a variety of settings, from work- related to educational to social, and it does so in both positive and negative ways. Just as when others hold high expectations for a person, their opinions tend to result in enhanced performance, when negative Pygmalions hold low expectations for others, their low expectations typically result in diminished performance. Consequently, managers’ expectations can help or hinder worker production, teachers’ expectations can boost or deflate student grades, and your own expectations can serve you as an ego maker or breaker. We live up to—and down to— expectations, whether these expectations emanate from others or ourselves. We are what we believe we are. What is important is that we recognize that our self-concept can change. At any point, we can work to strengthen

147

our sense of self-worth.

Positive Pygmalion: An individual who positively influences one’s perceptions of one’s own abilities.

Negative Pygmalion: An individual who negatively influences one’s perceptions of one’s own abilities.

REVISING YOUR SELF-CONCEPT: REEXAMINING IMPRESSIONS AND CONCEPTIONS

How others treat us and how we treat ourselves influence the person we think we are. Thus, if we wish to change our self-concept, we need to do our part to break with old ways of thinking. We need to update the way we think about ourselves and assess the accuracy of our self-concept. Figuratively speaking, we need to turn on a light inside ourselves so we become more self-aware, recognize the kinds of messages others send us, and be cognizant of messages we typically ignore, discount, or purposefully misinterpret.

While the tendency is to hold on to our existing self-concept—even when it is proved false—this does not mean that we cannot change it. We just have to work to overcome our natural resistance to change. In fact, some of us seek professional help in making meaningful changes. To combat the tendency to cling to an erroneous self-concept, we need to develop the willingness and skills to reevaluate or reinvent ourselves. That way, we will be better able to shed outdated conceptions—one impression at a time.

To start this process, we need to understand how we manage to maintain a self-image that others may regard as unrealistic. For example, we might suppose we are great thinkers while others believe our thinking lacks depth. Perhaps because we are overly concerned with how we come across to others, we put all our energy into presenting ourselves in as favorable a light as possible. When we focus on ourselves, however, we are less likely to notice others’ reactions to us, and we may miss feedback cues revealing how they really see us. In addition, sometimes we persist in holding on to an unrealistic self-image because others are reticent to reveal their true responses to us for fear of hurting our feelings. Instead, they tell us what they think we want to hear. Other times, we base our assessment of ourselves on obsolete information—we opt to cling to memories rather than face current realities.

148

Just as we can view ourselves more favorably than others do, we can also be our own worst critics and view ourselves more harshly than is warranted. For example, we might convince ourselves that we are fat despite others insisting we are a perfect weight. Why do we do this? We might be acting on the basis of outmoded data—information that was true at one time but is no longer true. Or we might receive distorted feedback from an overly critical friend that warps our view of ourselves. Or we might criticize ourselves simply because we believe that is what society expects us to do. We might feel that society prefers we own up to our inadequacies while downplaying our strengths.

When you visualize yourself, do you see a person who can achieve anything or a person with limitations who is likely to fail? Research reveals that conceptions of the self influence self-perspectives of failure.23 Do you view yourself more positively or negatively than you believe valid? Being too harsh on yourself can keep you from fulfilling your potential. Instead of denigrating yourself, assess your strengths and shortcomings honestly, freeing yourself to reshape your self-image and grow.

DIVERSITY AND CULTURE IN RELATIONSHIPS: HOW IMPORTANT IS THE “I”?

Individuals in most, if not all, cultures have a notion about the self, although the specific notions held vary across cultures, affecting person-to- person interactions in subtle to dramatic ways.24

THE SELF IN INDIVIDUALISTIC AND COLLECTIVISTIC CULTURES

In North American and Western European cultures, the word self reigns supreme, reflecting the importance individuals place on realizing their personal goals. Members of such individualistic cultures, in which individual identity is paramount, value uniqueness and personal identity; they tend to believe in themselves, seek to do their own thing, and shun conformity. In contrast, in the collectivistic cultures of Asia, Africa, and Central and South America, where group goals are given a higher priority than individual goals, individuals are more apt to downplay their own goals and emphasize goals set or valued by the group as a whole.25

149

Japanese parents, for example, typically refrain from lavishing praise on their children, believing that children who are overpraised are likely to end up being self-centered and not focused enough on the group’s needs.

Individualistic culture: A culture in which individual identity is paramount.

Collectivistic cultures: Cultures in which group goals are given a higher priority than individual goals.

For the members of collectivistic cultures, the self is not the center of the universe. For them, the group—not the individual—is the primary social unit. Where individualistic cultures link success with personal achievement, collectivistic cultures link it to group cohesion and loyalty. This basic difference is underscored by the fact that the “I” in the Chinese written language looks very much like the word for “selfish.”26 Members of collectivistic cultures gain a sense of identity through their group memberships, not by promoting themselves or stressing how important they are, as members of Western cultures are apt to do.27 Thus, while some of us have been raised to call attention to ourselves, sing our own praises, and develop ourselves at the group’s expense, others of us have been reared to avoid such behavior by nurturing the interdependent self instead.28

REFLECT ON THIS: Changes

In his book Uh-Oh, philosopher and author Robert Fulghum presents his observations concerning when and how our self-conceptions change:

Ask a kindergarten class, “How many of you can draw?” and all hands shoot up. Yes, of course we can draw—all of us. What can

150

you draw? Anything! How about a dog eating a fire truck in a jungle? Sure! How big you want it?

How many of you can sing? All hands. Of course we sing! What can you sing? Anything! What if you don’t know the words? No problem, we make them up. Let’s sing! Now? Why not!

How many of you dance? Unanimous again. What kid of music do you like to dance to? Any kind! Let’s dance! Now? Sure, why not?

Do you like to act in plays? Yes! Do you play musical instruments? Yes! Do you write poetry? Yes! Can you read and write and count? Yes! We’re learning that stuff now.

Their answer is Yes! Over and over again, Yes! The children are confident in spirit, infinite in resources, and eager to learn. Everything is still possible.

Try those same questions on a college audience. A small percentage of the students will raise their hands when asked if they draw or dance or sing or paint or act or play an instrument. Not infrequently, those who do raise their hands will want to qualify their response with their limitations: “I only play piano, I only draw horses, I only dance to rock and roll, I only sing in the shower.”

When asked why the limitations, college students answer that they do not have talent, are not majoring in the subject, or have not done any of these things since about third grade, or worse, that they are embarrassed for others to see them sing or dance or act. You can imagine the response to the same questions asked of an older audience. The answer: No, none of the above.

What went wrong between kindergarten and college? What happened to YES! Of course I can?

Consider these questions:

1. To what extent, if any, do your experiences support Fulghum’s observations?

2. What factors do you believe cause us to change our answers to Fulghum’s questions as we mature?

3. Based on Fulghum’s insights, what advice would you give today’s kindergarten and college students?

151

SOURCE: Robert Fulghum, Uh-Oh, New York: Villard Books, 1991, p. 228–229.

Idiocentric orientation: An orientation displayed by people who are primarily individualistic in their ways of thinking and behaving.

Allocentric orientation: A perspective displayed y people who are primarily collectivistic in their thinking and behaving.

Persons who are primarily individualistic in their thinking and behaving have an idiocentric orientation. Those who are primarily collectivistic in the way they think and behave have an allocentric orientation.29 To which group do you belong?

Our unique personal experiences and shared membership in groups influence how we define ourselves. Together with culture, these factors play integral parts in forming our self-concept. Still, care should always be taken against rigidly categorizing people from any given culture, whether individualistic or collectivistic in orientation. Keep in mind that variations occur within countries. For example, in the United States, persons from the South exhibit higher levels of collectivism than do people living the West.30 In addition, after persons from the Western and Eastern worlds interact with each other, their cultural orientations moderate. In fact, Asian exchange students who have lived in the United States tend to have somewhat more individualized self-concepts than do other Asian students.

Do you think American culture is becoming more individualistic or more

152

communal?

THE SELF IN HIGH- AND LOW-CONTEXT CULTURES

People from different cultures also exhibit different communication style preferences. Individuals belonging to high-context cultures tend to be very polite and indirect when interacting with others. In contrast, persons from low-context cultures typically exhibit a more direct communication style.31 When meeting someone for the first time, a person from a low- context culture is likely to ask direct questions in an effort to gather background information and get to know the person; the priority is the discovery and expression of individual uniqueness. Similarly, persons from individualistic cultures feel the need to explain everything and, because of the value they place on assertion, to speak out.

In comparison, persons from high-context cultures hesitate to ask others direct questions, preferring to rely on nonverbal, contextual information. They value silence and reticence, believing that persons of few words are thoughtful, trustworthy, and respectable. As a result, they also are likely to find unsolicited self-disclosures inappropriate. And because they would view such behavior as a sign of disrespect or disloyalty, they are less likely than persons from low-context cultures to criticize one another publicly. When their words hurt another person, they believe they hurt themselves as well.

THE SELF IN HIGH- AND LOW-POWER-DISTANCE CULTURES

Attitudes toward the self also differ along the dimension of power distance, or the extent to which individuals are willing to accept power differentials. Persons from high-power-distance cultures, such as Saudi Arabia and India, perceive power as a fact of life. In these cultures, persons in low-power positions are very apt to defer automatically to persons in authority. In contrast, persons from low-power-distance cultures, such as the United States and Sweden, are more likely to emphasize and value their independence even when superiors are present.32 A general feeling of equality prevails in such cultures (see Table 2.4).

High-context cultures: Cultures in which people tend to be very polite and indirect when interacting with others.

153

Low-context culture: A culture in which people typically exhibit a direct communication style.

Power distance: The extent to which individuals are willing to accept power differentials.

TRY THIS: Are You an “I” or Part of a “We”? Evaluate how much the statements in categories A and B below reflect how you think and act in regard to yourself and others. Rate each statement as follows: very important, 5; somewhat important, 4; neither important nor unimportant, 3; somewhat unimportant, 2; and not at all important, 1.

Compare your totals. The higher your Category A total, the greater your idiocentric tendencies. The higher your Category B total, the greater your allocentric tendencies.

TABLE 2.4 Culture and Influences on the Self

Persons with individualistic orientations

Conceive of the individual as the basic social unit Make individual goals a priority Link success and individual achievement

Persons with collectivistic orientations

Conceive of the family/group as the basic social unit Make interdependence/group goals a priority

154

Link success and group achievement

Persons from high-context cultures

Exhibit an indirect communication style Make face-saving a consideration

Persons from low-context cultures

Exhibit a direct communication style Seldom think of face-saving

Persons from high-power- distance cultures

Defer to superiors

Persons from low-power- distance cultures

Value independence

ATTITUDES TOWARD THE SELF ACROSS CULTURES

Even though their cultures may differ, young people throughout the world are likely to share many attitudes regarding the self. Most hope to develop and sustain social relationships, especially with their peers, and most are optimistic regarding their abilities to assume responsibilities for themselves in the future. In the face of the optimism displayed by the majority of young people, between 25 and 30 percent of them also describe themselves as lonely, overwhelmed by life’s problems, and frequently sad.33 Interestingly, Japanese teens are even more likely to attribute these traits to themselves, with 55 percent reporting frequently feeling sad and 39 percent reporting feeling lonely. Japanese young people are also almost twice as likely as young people from other cultures to fear disappointing their parents.34

Many years ago, clinical psychologists Darlene Powell Hopson and Derek Hopson, reported that African Americans expressed discontent with the self, finding that as early as the age of three, black children expressed the desire to be white, even expressing a preference to play with white dolls.35 Do you believe that such self-perceptions are related to African Americans’ being victims of racism? Based on your personal experiences, do you believe such feelings still exist today? A more recent study did not find that African Americans had negative attitudes toward the self because of skin tone.36 Do you believe, however, that negative attitudes toward the

155

self may exist in individuals who are members of marginalized groups, such as the elderly and people who are physically or mentally challenged?

True or False 5. Childhood experiences influence our ideas about gender. True. Children integrate into their self-concepts what those around them believe is appropriate behavior for a male or female.

GENDER AND SELF-CONCEPT

If you awoke one day to discover that you had changed into someone of the opposite sex, how would that affect you? In what ways, if any, would this alteration change your plans for the day? The week? The month? The year? What impact would it have on the rest of your life?

As we noted in Chapter 1, sex refers to the biological characteristics that define men and women. Gender, in contrast, refers to the socially constructed roles and behaviors that the members of a given society believe appropriate for men and women. Thus, gender is a variable that influences how others treat us and how we treat them because of our sex. Our gender becomes integrated into our self-concept, providing us with a gender identity, that is, an inner sense of being male or female. The experiences we have during our formative years influence our views of masculinity and femininity, affecting our identities in later years. As we internalize the attributes of maleness and femaleness, what we have come to believe about our gender affects the way we conceive of our self. Transgender activist Chaz Bono has been quoted as saying, “I believe gender is between your ears, not between your legs.”

Men and women are likely to see and describe themselves differently. Males generally characterize themselves as possessing initiative, control,

156

and ambition. In contrast, females see themselves as sensitive, concerned for others, and considerate. While appearance plays a major role in the self-image of women, until recently it was not considered integral to the self-image of a man.39 Young women are still teased about both their looks and their weight more often than are young men, but the macho male, muscular and fit, is making a comeback, placing pressure on men to “bulk up” or be thought of as unmanly.40

Gender identity: An inner sense of being male or female.

Unfortunately, in our society, social and cultural expectations cause women to be vulnerable to damage to their self-concepts, in part because of the many conflicting and confused messages they receive.41 Our society expects those who are feminine to be nurturing, unassertive, sensitive, caring, deferential, and emotional. As a result of such expectations, society rewards young women for a pleasing appearance, revealing their feelings, being forgiving, and being nice or helpful to others. In contrast, our society expects men to be strong, ambitious, in control of their emotions, and successful; unlike women, men are reinforced for displaying these qualities and achieving results.42

TRY THIS: Young and Old 1. Interview a male relative and a female relative, both of whom are

older. Ask them these questions:

a. Who are you? What roles do you perform? What adjectives describe you?

b. How has the way you see yourself today changed from how you saw yourself when you were a child, a young adult, and middle- aged?

c. How do you believe the ways your family and friends see you have changed through the years?

d. Is there an era of your life you would want to repeat? Why?

2. The following quotations reveal the self-perceptions of two older people. These quotations are not meant to characterize all older people; rather, they are used to illustrate, from their perspective,

157

how aging affects self-perception:

The young want everything to move fast. They let their impatience show in their eyes. When you are hard of hearing it is worse. People get impatient when you try to join in. They yell in your face. Finally, they just give up on you and act like you are not there because it is too much trouble to try and keep you in the flow of things.37

You ask me if I enjoy remembering things from the past. Well I do. . . . it is as if there are reels of movies in my head, all starting at different eras. I can go back and start one up any time. Different people, dressed differently, living in rooms and houses without electricity. And all starring a different me, of course . . . the past—what I did and accomplished and endured and loved—are all part of who I am.38

Compare and contrast the answers your interviewees provided to the questions listed above with the perceptions of these two people.

Of significance is the finding that our society values male characteristics more highly than female characteristics. Thus, men typically feel better about themselves than do women. The upshot is that many women try harder and harder to attain success by attempting to be it all and do it all. The comedian Carol Leifer perhaps put it best in her act when she said, “I just had a baby an hour ago and I’m back at work already. While I was delivering, I took a course in tax-shelter options.”

SEEING THE SELF THROUGH THE MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGY LOOKING GLASS

The products of our modern lives provide the programs, films, music, and applications that help us forge our identities, our sense of self, and who we want to be. From these we learn how to dress, look, interact, and consume. We learn who has power and who does not, who has followers and who does not. The sites and media we frequent also influence our sense of ethnicity and race, gender, and class.

REFLECT ON THIS: Beauty Standards and Dying to Be Thin

158

In “The Girl Who Could Never Be Thin Enough: One Family’s Tragedy,” we learn about Stacy Asbury, a teenager suffering from anorexia nervosa who sadly succumbed to the disease. Her father, Tom, was left heartbroken at his inability to help his daughter overcome the disease’s ravages. Approximately 100,000 people, both female and male, but predominantly female, have this disease. Like Stacy, because of their desire to be thin and the distorted images they have of their own bodies, 3 to 5 percent of sufferers starve and exercise themselves to death. They do jumping jacks to the point of exhaustion—until they can no longer raise their hands above their waists—until their hearts are no longer able to support their frail bodies.

Consider these questions:

1. In your opinion, is it appropriate for any industry to send women the message that beauty and thinness are requisites for success?

2. What role do the cosmetic and diet industries play in feeding a woman’s longing to attain a self that mirrors the ideal presented in media?

3. In what ways, if any, are the messages the media send women any different from the messages they send men regarding athleticism and the ideal muscular build?

4. Should we blame the media for individuals’ feelings of inferiority or inadequacy?

5. What, if anything, can we do to counter the effects of media messages and campaigns featuring male and female ideals?

SOURCE: Gene Wojciechowski, “The Girl Who Could Never Be Thin Enough: One Family’s Tragedy,” special to Los Angeles Times, December 27, 1993. See also Naomi

159

Wolf, The Beauty Myth, New York: Morrow, 1991.

THE IMPACT OF THE MEDIA

Media depictions help us assess what the general public’s preferred patterns of behavior and appearance are. They help shape our opinions about how our bodies should look, how males and females should interact, and the meaning of success. The way we interpret their offerings reinforces or negates our own sense of self by influencing our sense of who we are as compared to who we should aspire to be.

Often we are not conscious of the extent to which the media work us over, how much they are “make-believe media”—that is, they make us believe.43 Our concepts of what we should be like or, for that matter, what our relationships should be like, or even more specifically what African Americans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans, and males and females are supposed to be like, are conveyed to us via the media, so much so that some critics complain that the media preempt real life, offering us fabricated views of the world in its place.

Make-believe media: Media offerings that make us believe things that are not necessarily true.

Among the media’s messages are that violence against women is commonplace; that men are hard, tough, and independent; and that minorities and women are less visible than men. Women, for example, were underrepresented in the one hundred top-grossing films of 2011, which featured fewer female than male protagonists and female characters who were younger than the male characters. Women were also less likely than men to be portrayed as leaders and more likely to be identified by their marital status.44 Other messages are that African American males are either athletes or unlawful, that Asian males are awkward, and that Muslim men are terrorists. Such messages often distort how we see ourselves and influence our perception of what is normal and desirable behavior. In addition, media models adversely affect our evaluations of ourselves as attractive, successful, or smart. And all too often, the thirst the media develop in us for “beautiful thing-hood” turns into painful and enduring feelings of inadequacy when we are unable to acquire the items we covet.45

160

THE IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGY

We derive our sense of self not only from communicating face-to-face but also from communicating online. By using technology we participate in the creation of new worlds and new ways of finding out about ourselves. Interacting in cyberspace, we can be ourselves or, at time, someone else— that is, we can exist as personas.

For some of us, the lives we live are more virtual than real. Some of us regularly inhabit virtual worlds, participating in simulations and assuming different personas. We may have a number of e-mail and Twitter addresses and various screen names as we use the Internet to experiment with multiple identities—while concealing our real identities from both friends and strangers with whom we interact online.46 We might, for example, pose as a member of the opposite sex, conceal our age or ethnicity, hide physical characteristics, or otherwise pretend to be someone we are not. In other words, online we can be genderless, raceless, rankless, and appearanceless.47

We also can create parallel identities that facilitate the exploration of murkier aspects of the self, something very different from being an employee part of the day, a student another part of the day, and a family member at home. As psychologist Sherry Turkle notes, “The obese can be slender, the beautiful plain, the ‘nerdy’ sophisticated” due to the construction of an identity that is not part of their authentic selves. Turkle asserts that instead of developing internally, as a result of our being overly influenced by the opinions of others, the self is being externally manufactured. She contends that when we tweet and communicate via Facebook, we are playing to the crowd—presenting a self that is based on what others respond to positively.48

Research shows that we try to present ourselves in as positive a light as possible online—especially, as we noted as the outset of this chapter, when using a social networking site such as Facebook. In effect, we psychologically boost our ego, enhancing our self-esteem.49 Some researchers believe that Facebook has a dark side, in that it feeds users’ narcissistic tendencies by providing opportunities for self-promotion, access to shallow relationships and detached communication, and numerous self-solicitations for support.50 Other researchers disagree, however, contending that frequency of Facebook use is not associated with

161

narcissism—a trait they assert applies only to those Facebook users who gather unrealistically inflated numbers of friends—but rather with greater openness and lower concern regarding privacy.51 For avid online game players, spending too much time online can result in depression and anxiety, because failing in game playing becomes as real as failing in real life.52

Cyberspace: The virtual space that exists in an online or computer environment.

What are you like online? Does communicating online tend to make you more or less social? More or less inhibited? Do you act more or less yourself? Do you assume multiple identities, negotiate identities, or relate as yourself? What have you learned about yourself interacting with others online?

ANALYZE THIS: MEdia

In Sidney Lumet’s award-winning 1976 film Network, written by Paddy Chayefsky, the main character, a television news anchorman, speaks these words to his audience:

Television is not the truth. We lie like hell. . . . We deal in illusions, man. None of it is true. But you people sit there day after day, night after night. . . . We’re all you know. You’re beginning to think that the tube is reality and your own lives are unreal. You do what the tube tells you to do. You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube,

162

you raise your children like the tube. In God’s name, you people are the real thing; we’re the illusion!

1. What does the preceding quotation suggest about our relationship with media?

2. Compare and contrast the image you have of each of the following with the image portrayed in the media. Which image do you prefer and why?

A nurse

A lawyer

The police

A corporate executive

The wealthy

Arabs

Teenagers

Older people

1. Divide your life into three approximately equal segments. For example, if you are currently twenty-one years old, divide your life into the following segments: ages one to seven, eight to fourteen, and fifteen to twenty-one. From each life segment, select a television program, film/DVD, music video/song, or book that you believe exerted a significant influence on your self-perception and interaction with others. Explain its influence.

2. If you could trade places with any media personality or character, past or present, who would it be and why?

SOURCE: Quote from Network, written by Paddy Chayefsky, MGM and United Artists, 1976.

GAINING COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE: WAYS TO STRENGTHEN YOUR SELF-CONCEPT

We all carry a figurative snapshot of the person we think we are wherever we go. Our snapshot is an impressionist collage of merged images: what

163

we think we were like in the past, what we wish we had been like, what we think we are like right now, and what we expect to be like in the future. In many ways, our photo is a composite of how we see ourselves, how we wish we saw ourselves, and how we imagine others see us. Use the following suggestions to improve your mental picture-taking ability and to develop a clearer sense of self.

UPDATE PICTURES

Although changing your mental image of yourself is not easy, it is possible. To do it, remind yourself that a photo captures but a moment in time linked to a particular environment and communication context. Each picture you shoot, however, reveals a somewhat different you. Photos are frozen in time. People are not. We change from moment to moment, person to person, year in and year out. Thus, while our memories are important and help us construct our sense of who we are, we need to keep the mental picture we carry with us current. By doing this, we will be better able to discount images that no longer accurately represent us, and thereby avoid focusing on what psychologists refer to as regrets—“the lost lives, lost selves a person could have lived or been if s/he had done a few things differently.”53

How clear is the picture you have of you?

TAKE LOTS AND LOTS OF PICTURES

Watch yourself in action. Review your self-snapshots, periodically taking time to reassess the roles you perform, the statements you use to describe

164

yourself, and the extent to which you approve of your own values and behavior. Are you satisfied as you scroll through them? Do you have realistic goals? It takes courage and open-mindedness to do this.

WATCH THIS 2.1 For a video on self-concept visit the student study site.

EXPLORE OTHERS’ PICTURES OF YOU

The people we interact with regularly often see the strengths or weakness we tend to either overlook or underplay. While we need not become what others think we are, if we are willing to explore others’ perceptions of us, we at least open ourselves to the possibility of change. If we are receptive to how others see us, we may be able to make adjustments and become more effective in other person-to-person contacts.

PICTURE POSSIBILITIES

The self is flexible and changeable. In a constant transitional state, it has the capacity to adapt to changing circumstances and conditions. By asking yourself, “Who am I now?” instead of “Who am I always?” you will be able to take picture after picture of a changing you, someone who opens him- or herself to the possibilities that today and tomorrow offer. As a Xerox executive said in a speech aptly titled “Butterflies, Not Pigeonholes”:

In a knowledge-driven economy, self-confidence means a willingness to champion new ideas and the resilience to roll with the punches when ideas turn out to be better in the abstract than in reality. Plus, self-confidence provides the persistence to try again from another angle. Self-confidence enables an individual to withstand the criticism of colleagues, to live with the fact that not everyone will like everyone else.

And it gives one the ability to listen to others, to work as part of a team, to be willing to let others share the load ... and the spotlight, confident that one’s contribution to the success of the whole will be recognized.

165

In short, self-confidence enables people to feel comfortable outside the pigeonholes, to contribute in an ever-changing environment. Without it, the most gifted individual can toil in the shadows, the gifts of provenance never fully realized.54

Isn’t it better to picture yourself as a butterfly, free, than stuck in a pigeonhole?

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Aisha’ Term Paper

“I’ll never be able to pass this course,” Aisha moaned to herself as she sat at Starbucks staring at her laptop with her text opened beside her. “I’ve been trying to write this paper all weekend and I’m still on the first page.” She sighed deeply, and then rose to get another cup of coffee. As Aisha sipped her coffee, she began to thumb through the Sunday paper. She stopped to read an article about the Efficacy Institute, a school that provides students with instruction on self-concept. The article noted that studies on “efficacy” suggest that any person can succeed if he or she is motivated and works hard. Efficacy programs help students believe in themselves by repeatedly delivering messages such as “Work hard!” “Think you can!” “Believe in yourself!” Aisha began to think about her own situation. She had dropped out of college years earlier and had only recently reenrolled. Now she found herself stuck in the same old trap—she didn’t think she could do the work. Aisha wondered—should she also enroll at the Efficacy Institute? Aisha remembered how bad she had felt after dropping out of college, and now she was experiencing those same feelings of failure— all because of this paper. Then she had a brainstorm. She typed the

166

following lines on her laptop and posted them on her Facebook wall: Recipe for Success in College

1. Believe in Your Abilities to Succeed.

2. Work Hard on All Assignments.

3. You can do it!

She stared at the words. Then she started writing. Her head was filled with so many new ideas that her fingers could barely keep up. Could all these ideas have come from the simple lines she had just posted? Aisha didn’t dwell on the question. She was working too hard and writing too fast to ponder that possibility. What do you think?

1. Do you believe that improving a college student’s self-esteem will enable him or her to earn better grades? Why or why not?

2. Are there recipes for success you believe a student should follow to succeed in college? What about in the world of work? In life? If so, describe them, comparing and contrasting your various success recipes.

3. Does self-talk—that is, what you tell yourself—influence your chances of succeeding? Explain.

REVIEW THIS CHAPTER SUMMARY

1 Define self-concept, distinguishing it from the self. Self-concept, the baseline for communication, is that relatively stable set of perceptions we attribute to ourselves. Composed of everything we think and feel about the self, it guides our communicative behavior.

2 Explain reflected appraisal theory, social comparison theory, and Confirmation, rejection, and disconfirmation, using them to discuss

167

the role you and others play in shaping the self-concept. According to reflected appraisal theory, our self-concept reflects how we believe others see us. According to social comparison theory, we compare ourselves to others to develop a feel for how we measure up to them. Confirmation supports our self-appraisal, rejection negates our self- appraisal, and disconfirmation reveals a total disregard for us as a person, suggesting that for the other person, we do not exist, robbing us of a sense of self.

3 Define self-fulfilling prophecy and distinguish between positive and negative Pygmalions. A self-fulfilling prophecy is a prediction that increases the likelihood that an anticipated outcome will occur. A positive Pygmalion has positive expectations and fosters positive change in us, while a negative Pygmalion has low or no expectations and fosters diminished performance in us.

4 Explain the influence that cultural diversity and gender have on self-concept. Cultural differences influence our self-notions. Whether we are from an individualistic or collectivistic culture, display an idiocentric or an allocentric orientation, or ascribe to masculine or feminine gender prescriptions is derived from the lessons taught us by society and culture.

5 Describe how media and technology affect self-concept. Media and technology provide us with information about preferred patterns of behavior and appearance, sometimes causing us to develop unrealistic expectations for ourselves and at times either adversely or positively affecting our feelings of adequacy.

6 Identify how you can change and strengthen your self-concept. To strengthen our feelings of self-worth, we need to reassess the nature of our self-concept periodically, visit and revisit others’ perceptions of us, and keep ourselves open to the possibility of change.

CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING

1 Can you identify the components of self-concept and then use them to

168

describe yourself? (See pages 36–37.)

2 Can you describe how the social comparisons you make with others influence your thoughts about yourself? How does reflected appraisal theory play out in your own life? (See pages 40–42.)

3 Can you name individuals who have served as positive and negative Pygmalions in your life, making you feel better or worse about yourself? Can you explain how you have served as a positive/negative Galatea for yourself? (See pages 44–46.)

4 Can you explain how living in an individualistic or collectivistic culture affects a person’s self-concept? What about living in a celebrity- obsessed culture? How about when communicating online? (See pages 47–51.)

5 Can you identify steps you can take to strengthen your self-concept? (See pages 55–56.)

CHECK YOUR SKILLS

1 Can you describe your “perceived identity”? (See pages 36–37 and 42; and Try This, page 38.)

2 Can you provide examples of your personal growth and participation in the process of self-renewal? (See page 38.)

3 Can you identify situations that have affected how you see yourself? (See pages 39–40.)

4 Can you name the people and reference groups you use to gauge whether you are a success? (See pages 41–42.)

5 Can you use Goffman’s dramaturgical approach to human interaction to make a good impression on others? (See page 42.)

6 Can you point to individuals who have confirmed, rejected, and disconfirmed your sense of self, and describe how you have done the

169

same for others? (See pages 43–44; and Try This, page 45.)

7 Can you function as a positive Pygmalion? (See page 46.)

8 Can you determine if you have sufficient self-awareness to reevaluate yourself? (See pages 46–47.)

9 Can you provide examples demonstrating your culture’s effects on how you see yourself? (See Try This, page 50; and Try This, page 52.)

10 Can you use your skills to analyze how self-concept can act to limit or enhance opportunities? (See The Case of Aisha’s Term Paper, page 57.)

KEY TERMS

Self-awareness 36

Self-concept 36

Self-image 36

Self-esteem 36

Reflected appraisal theory 40

Social comparison theory 41

Perceived self 42

Ideal self 42

Impression management 42

Possible self 42

Expected self 42

Dramaturgical approach to human interaction 42

Confirmation 43

170

Rejection 43

Disconfirmation 44

Self-efficacy 44

Self-fulfilling prophecy 44

Positive Pygmalion 46

Negative Pygmalion 46

Individualistic cultures 47

Collectivistic cultures 47

Idiocentric orientation 48

Allocentric orientation 48

High-context cultures 48

Low-context cultures 48

Power distance 48

Gender identity 51

Make-believe media 53

Cyberspace 54

STUDENT STUDY SITE

Visit the student study site at www.sagepub.com/gambleic to access the following

• SAGE Journal Articles

• Videos

• Web Resources

171

• eFlashcards

• Web Quizzes

• Study Questions

172

3Chapter

The future is a foreign country, and we are travelers and explorers.

—Raj Aggarwal, Frank C. Sullivan Professor

of International Business and Finance, University of Akron

PERCEPTION LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this chapter, you should be able to demonstrate

173

mastery of the following learning outcomes:

1. Explain the perception process and its relationship to reality. 2. Define the figure-ground principle, closure, and perceptual constancy.

3. Explain how schemata, perceptual sets and selectivities, and ethnocentrism and stereotypes influence perception.

4. Distinguish among the following perceptual barriers: fact-inference confusions, allness, indiscrimination, frozen evaluations, snap judgments, and blindering.

5. Discuss how culture, gender, and media and technology influence perceptions of social experience.

6. Identify strategies you can use to enhance your perceptual abilities.

In speed dating we rely on “thin slicing”— basing our impression of another person solely on an abbreviated

behavioral glimpse.

ow accurate are the quick perceptions we form of other people? And how good are the decisions we make based on these virtually instant perceptions? Consider speed dating, for example. In speed dating instant perceptions? Consider speed dating, for example. In

speed dating we rely on “thin slicing”—basing our impression of another person solely on an abbreviated behavioral glimpse.1 During a speed- dating cycle we may interact round-robin style with as many as twelve possible partners, with each individual “date” lasting on average from three to eight minutes. While some believe we should be able to make judgments about how close we want to become with a potential dating partner during such a short time—even as short as 30 seconds—others are not so sure.2

Interestingly, researchers report that thin slicing produces accurate judgments.3 Within 30 seconds, speed-dating participants are able to report either being or not being attracted to someone. The speed daters acknowledge a lack of attraction or negative physical qualities as potential partner turnoffs, with females reporting three times as many negative judgments as do males. The turn-ons they report are physical attractiveness

174

and positive behavior and demeanor, including positive perceptions of a potential date’s communication and presentation skills.4 What is more, participants are likely to report more attraction for those they perceive to share attributes with themselves, whether or not those perceived similarities are accurate.5 And men report that similarity influences their attraction to a potential partner more than do women.6

While we are good at forming rapid, relatively accurate perceptions of others when deciding whom to date, are we as capable of forming quick and accurate perceptions when it comes to making other decisions, including whether a person is racially biased? What do you think?

WHAT DO YOU KNOW?

Before continuing your reading of this chapter, which of the following five statements do you believe to be true and which do you believe to be false?

1. Differences in perception are rare. TF

2. We can process unlimited amounts of data eachsecond. T F

3. We have a tendency to fill in perceptual gaps. TF

4. Dividing people into in- and out-groups improvesperceptual accuracy. T F

5. “The sun will rise tomorrow” technically is not astatement of fact. T F

Read the chapter to discover if you’re right or if you’ve made any erroneous assumptions.

175

ANSWERS: 1. F; 2. F; 3. T; 4. F; 5. T

To advance the understanding of perception and its role in decision making, Paul Allen, cofounder of the Microsoft Corporation, recently donated $300 million to a project devoted to mapping the brain’s circuitry of perception and analyzing the billions of cells and synapses at work in vision, memory, and awareness.7 Scientists hope that decoding these processes will increase our understanding of how we perceive.

True or False 1. Differences in perception are rare. False. Differences in perception occur regularly.

OUR PERCEPTION DEFINES OUR REALITY

Should we believe our eyes? In the effort to answer this question, researchers study the relationships among perception, reality, and performance. When playing well, for example, tennis and baseball players report that the ball looks larger than it does when they are playing poorly. Golfers playing well similarly report that the cup looks bigger than when they are playing poorly. And basketball players say that the hoop appears oversized when their game is on but not so when True or False they are in a scoring slump.8 Perceive the ball, hole, or hoop to be larger, and you may be on your way to improving your athletic prowess—even if what you perceive is not really there.9

However, what if computer artists play with reality by creating an illusion that renders what is actually before your eyes invisible? For example, Cleo

176

Berry, a struggling and overweight actor, accepted $500 from a photographer to pose for some photographs. Unbeknownst to Berry, the photographer sold the photos to the New York City Health Department for use in its antiobesity campaign. To stress that eating fast food and sugary sodas can lead to type 2 diabetes, which can lead to limb amputation, the advertising agency handling the campaign for the health department digitally edited the lower half of Berry’s right leg out of the photo. One day, a friend alerted Berry that his image—absent a leg—was all over the Internet and TV. An able-bodied person, Berry was distressed by the use of the manipulated image, in part because the campaign could have used images of an actual amputee instead.10

Today it is so easy to reproduce or alter visual images that it has become normal to be skeptical regarding what is real.11 The yellow line that appears scribbled down the football field on your TV screen is not really there; it is created with a digital pen. The ads you can see behind home plate when you watch baseball on TV are not really there; they are computer-generated effects. Dead celebrities appear in new commercials. And the eyewitness testimony given during trials is wrong about one-third of the time.12 We do not always agree on what is before our eyes. Our eyes can be deceived.

DO WE SEE THE SAME REALITY? Our lack of agreement about what we see is particularly apparent when we consider art. For example, take the work of performance artist Marina Abramović, pictured here. Would you call a person sitting still in a room “art”? The fact that answers to this question vary illustrates a key aspect of perception— different people do not always view the same situations in the same ways. For the same reason, people do not agree on the meaning of Edvard Munch’s painting The Scream. Our perception is a consequence of who we are, where we are, and what we choose to see.

177

Performance artist Marina Abramović at work. Is this art?

Culture, race, age, gender, geographic location, and life experiences combine to create perceptual gulfs between us and those whose culture, race, age, gender, geographic location, and life experiences differ from ours. Confronted with issues such as race relationships, gender equity, the economic crisis, and the political divide, many of us see different realities. It is not uncommon for our perceptions of events and people to conflict. In fact, differences in the ways we see, hear, taste, smell, or feel specific stimuli—that is, differences in how we perceive—occur all the time. Is it because we cannot perceive what is really there? Is it because we perceive what we want to perceive? Is it because we never experience the exact same reality as anyone else?13

178

What does The Scream mean to you?

In this chapter we explore such questions as we describe how we perceive our world. By learning more about the perception process, we prepare ourselves to handle the interpersonal problems that perceptual variations and disagreements present. By exploring why different individuals experience the same stimuli differently, we may better understand why they think and act differently as well. Only by getting behind the eye of the “I” can we come to understand why “where we stand depends on where we sit.”14 In other words, social circumstances, experiences, and daily person-to-person interactions affect perception. The experiences we have had as members of particular groups shape how we perceive situations, people, and ourselves by affecting our standpoint. According to standpoint theory, persons in positions of power have an overriding interest in preserving their place in the social hierarchy; therefore, they develop views of social life that are likely to be more distorted than those of persons who stand to gain little, if anything, from their positions in the social hierarchy.15 As a result, it is easier for the powerless to feel inequities than for those who are empowered. In contrast, persons who

179

occupy less powerful or marginalized positions develop keener insights into how society works, if only because they need to develop these understandings to survive.16

By becoming aware of diverse perspectives and interacting with persons whose standpoints differ significantly from our own, we can develop better-balanced perception.17

PERCEPTION IN ACTION: THE PROCESS AT WORK

Perception is the process we use to make sense of experience. Through perception, we give meaning to the world, making it our own:

• We actively select or choose to focus on relatively few stimuli.

• We organize or give order to the stimuli.

• We interpret sensory data or explain what we have selected and organized.

• We remember what we have observed.

• We respond.

While waiting to order in a popular restaurant, for example, we may observe two people meeting for lunch, size them up as businesspeople, and decide that they are meeting to close an important deal.

Standpoint theory: A theory that one’s place in the power hierarchy influences the accuracy of one’s perception of social life.

Perception: The process used to make sense of experience.

We use our perceptual powers to decide what people are like and to give meaning to their behavior. Using the sensory data we take in, we form impressions of others. When engaging in interpersonal perception, we also ask questions about others regarding their relationship to us, draw conclusions about their personalities, and make judgments about their intentions.

According to uncertainty reduction theory, we monitor the social environment to learn more about each other.18 We seek information about each other because if we lack such knowledge, we could fail in our efforts

180

to predict behavior and its consequences. Thus, upon meeting someone, we will choose certain cues to attend to. We might note, for example, that the person is female, older than we are, speaks with a foreign accent, is well groomed, and seems approachable. Our next step would be to organize the information we have gathered so that we are able to store it and/or use it. This is followed by an effort to evaluate and interpret the meaning of our perceptions, which are placed in our memory for retrieval whenever we need or choose to respond.

True or False 2. We can process unlimited amounts of data each second. False. The brain can handle only 500 bits of information per second.

According to information theorists, although our senses can process approximately 5 million bits of data every second, our brains can handle only about 500 bits per second.19 Because of our inability to perceive everything, we are compelled to be selective about the stimuli we become aware of.20 As a result, we focus on certain cues and ignore others. Figure 3.1 illustrates the process of perception in action.

SELECTION As you read this chapter, stop and look around you. What do you see? What captures your attention? Is it the hum of the refrigerator, the feel of your chair, the color of the walls, or voices coming from another location? Consciously turn your attention to something different. What did you fail to notice initially that now makes an impression on you?

Since we can attend to only a limited number of stimuli from an array of

181

randomly competing stimuli at one time, we choose which persons, situations, or events to perceive. We use all our senses to gather information. Multiple factors influence what we pay attention to and what we ignore, what enters our awareness and what exists unobserved and unnoticed.

Figure 3.1 The Perception Process

When we interact with others, we select the cues on which we focus. Some of us focus on appearance, others on the strength of a handshake, and still others on the sound of the voice or the look in the person’s eyes. Whatever we select to focus on, we direct our attention to certain qualities and not others.

Uncertainty reduction theory: A theory that states that individuals learn more about each other by monitoring their social environment.

Usually we focus on a stimulus that is more intense than others or that reflects our motives or interest more than others. For example, we pay attention to a loud noise that disrupts our concentration. Likewise, we overhear a conversation near us in a diner if the two people are speaking about a topic that concerns us. Our interests influence what we perceive, as do our motives. When, for example, we are concerned with our financial situation, we notice more information about how to save money. When considering a new car, we notice the kinds of cars our relatives and friends drive. When we are hungry, we become more aware of food establishments, or we notice the aroma of what someone else is eating. When we are late for an appointment, we might run right past a close friend without even seeing her.

182

Selective perception: The aspect of perception comprising selective exposure, selective attention, and selective retention, which enables individuals to see, hear, and believe only what they want to.

Selective exposure: The practice of exposing oneself to people and messages that confirm one’s existing beliefs, values, or attitudes.

Selective attention: The means by which one focuses on certain cues while ignoring others.

Selective retention: The recalling of things that reinforce one’s thinking and the forgetting of things one finds objectionable.

Horn effect: The perception of negative qualities in a person one dislikes.

Halo effect: The perception of positive qualities in a person one likes.

Figure-ground principle: A strategy that facilitates the organization of stimuli by enabling one to focus on different stimuli alternately.

Closure: The process by which one fills in a missing perceptual piece.

Once our attention is captured, we organize the sensory data to interpret and evaluate them. As we attempt to make sense out of the flood of stimuli competing for our awareness, the personal nature of our selective processes takes over. We do not all experience the same stimuli in the same way. We all have different thresholds of arousal that need to be crossed before a stimulus captures our attention. The cues we select to attend to depend more on the kind of perceiver we are than on what is actually occurring. In addition to our sensory acuity, our loves, hatreds, and desires come into play during the selection process.

According to psychologist Herbert Simon, “A wealth of information creates a poverty of attention.”21 When we direct our attention to some stimuli while choosing to ignore others, we demonstrate selective perception. What are the specific cues you tend to focus on when you first meet someone? What do you look for? What do you listen for? Three components of the perceptual process provide answers to these questions:

• Selective exposure is our preference for people and messages that confirm our existing beliefs, values, or attitudes, such as paying attention to messages delivered by a candidate we are supporting.

• Selective attention is the means by which we focus on certain cues but ignore others, such as not noticing the look of disgust on the face

183

of someone we like.

• Selective retention is the practice by which we recall things that reinforce our thinking and forget things we find objectionable, such as recalling positive qualities of persons we like and negative qualities of persons we dislike.22

In using any of these, we may bias the perceptual process of selection and end up with distorted views of people or events. For example, think about a relationship you once shared but ended. Once you made the decision to end it, did you begin to notice more about the person that you disliked? This is known as the horn effect, which occurs when our perception tends toward the flaws of a person or thing. Compare this phenomenon to what happens when you decide to take a personal relationship to a more serious level. Once you have made this kind of decision, instead of perceiving what is negative about the other person, you are more likely to perceive additional things that you like. The reverse of the horn effect is known as the halo effect.

Selective perception helps us create a somewhat limited but more coherent and personally meaningful picture of the world—a picture that conforms to our beliefs, expectations, and convictions.23

ORGANIZATION Just as we use a number of strategies to select what impressions we notice, so we use a number of strategies to facilitate our meaningful organization of these impressions. One strategy is to categorize a stimulus according to the figure-ground principle. What we choose to focus on becomes the figure, and the rest of what we experience is the ground. We are able to alternate the figure and ground of what we perceive. In a classroom, for example, if you focus on what a fellow student is doing during your professor’s lecture, the student becomes the figure, while the professor recedes into the background. When you focus your attention on the professor, she is the figure, and the rest of the classroom is the ground.

A second organizing strategy we rely on is closure. Every time we fill in a missing perceptual piece, we exhibit closure. Look at the stimuli pictured in Figure 3.2. What do you see? Most see a dog and a circle. Because we seek to close gaps, we mentally fill in the incomplete figures. We want to perceive a completed world, as it were, so we supply elements that are not

184

really part of the stimuli or messages we process. For example, the assumptions we make about others’ motivations help us make sense of our own relationships. We might conclude that a friend invited us to a party only because she needed our help in passing a course. Whether the sense we make is right or wrong, justified or unjustified, it fills in certain gaps. Just as what you choose to notice is up to you, you can choose how to organize what you perceive.

True or False 3. We have a tendency to fill in perceptual gaps. True. We seek to perceive a completed world.

A third organizational strategy we use is perceptual constancy—the tendency we have to maintain the same perception of stimuli over time. As a consequence of perceptual constancy, we often see people not as they are but as we have been conditioned to see them. The constancy principle helps explain why we find it difficult to alter a perception once we form it. A large number of our perceptions are learned and then reinforced over time.

Perceptual constancy is facilitated by our use of schemata, which are the mental templates or knowledge structures we carry with us, and scripts, the general ideas we have about people and situations and how things should play out. We develop schemata and scripts based on both real and vicarious experiences. It is by reverting to schemata that we are able to classify people into manageable categories, according to their appearance, psychological traits, group memberships, and so on. Sometimes schemata, as we will discover later in this chapter, also contribute to stereotyping, which can lead us to see what is not there while too often causing us to

185

ignore what is there.

EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION As we evaluate and interpret experience, the meaning we assign to experience is influenced by a number of individual affectors—factors that color our responses—including culture, roles, biases, present emotional state, past experiences, and physical limitation or capabilities. If you are looking for a fight, you may perceive an insult. If you are hungry, you may smell food. If you are looking for a date, you are more likely to interpret a statement as a flirtation. Relative to the horn and halo effects, we likely view people with whom we seek a relationship more positively than we view those about whom we have no feelings one way or the other. If, on the other hand, we are in an unhappy relationship, it is likely that we will interpret our partner’s behavior more critically than if we were impartial.24

Among other variables influencing the interpretation/evaluation process are the degree of involvement we have or expect to have with a person, the knowledge we have relative to the person’s intentions, our feelings about ourselves in relation to the other person, and the assumptions we make about human behavior in general and this person’s behavior in particular.

Perceptual constancy: The tendency to maintain the way one sees the world.

Schemata: The mental templates or knowledge structures with them.

Scripts: The general ideas that individuals have about persons and situations and how things should play out.

Affectors: Factors that color responses to stimuli, including, but not limited to, culture, roles, biases, emotional state, past experiences, physical limitations, and capabilities.

MEMORY Memory is a human construct—a composite of what we read, piece together, experience, and/or want to be true.25 How we interpret and evaluate a stimulus determines whether or not what we experience enters our memory. What we remember we can retrieve later. The question is, how reliable is what we remember? Can we count on our perceptual abilities to supply us with accurate memories of experience?

186

Consider this: when Americans were surveyed and asked to recall their memories of what they observed on September 11, 2001, 76 percent of those surveyed in New York and 73 percent of those surveyed nationwide recalled watching television broadcasts of the two planes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center.26 These, however, were false memories. In fact, on that day there was no video of the first plane hitting the tower.

We do not simply reproduce what we store in our memory. Instead of objectively recalling an experience, we attempt to reconstruct a memory at the time of withdrawal. However, as we engage in retrospection or backward reasoning, inaccuracies may creep in. While trying to remember, we infer past occurrences based on who we are and what we now believe and know. We tend to recall information consistent with our schemata and discount or forget information that is not. On the other hand, if information dramatically contradicts any of our schemata, compelling us to think about it, this can lead us to revise the schemata we use.

Figure 3.2 Illustrations of the Closure Principle

RESPONSE Perception is a mixture of external stimulation and an internal state. We actively participate by controlling our responses to stimuli. Effectually, we are both the cause and the controlling force of our perceptions. The result is how we make sense of the world and relate to others.

187

Attribution theory helps us understand why we respond as we do to persons and events. It also speaks to the fact that we like to be able to explain why others behave as they do. Why, for example, did thirty-two- year-old Anders Behring Breivik murder seventyseven people in Norway, eight at government buildings in Oslo and sixty-nine at a summer camp? Was it because he was mentally ill? Did he feel alienated from society? Was it his warped view of Christian fundamentalism? Did something go wrong with his upbringing? In an effort to make sense out of what happened, we make educated guesses about what motivated Breivik to commit such crimes. While the circumstances are rarely so dramatic or tragic, we do the same with people we know. We assign meaning to the behavior of others by ascribing motives and causes for their actions. For instance, suppose a couple seated near you in a restaurant get up in the middle of their meal and leave. Why did they leave? Did they have an argument? Did they feel ill? Was the food bad? Was the room too warm? When we attribute behavior to something in the disposition of the people involved, we assume it have an internal cause—that is, we believe it is caused by their characteristics. When we attribute it to something about the situation or environment, we identify an external cause—that is, we believe the behavior to be caused by something outside of them.

The terrorist attack of 9/11 is the most memorable TV event of the past fifty years. But do we remember it as it happened?

Let’s say, for example, that your date arrives to pick you up early, and you want to figure out why. Some internal attributions are that he is a stickler for punctuality, that he was eager to see you, and that he did not want you to have to wait for him. Each of these reasons points to an internal

188

characteristic of your date as the cause of the behavior. External attributions are that the traffic was much lighter than it usually is, that he was able to leave work early, and that he did not have to run the errands he thought would be necessary. Each of these point to something in the external environment as causing the behavior.

Attribution theory: A theory that posits that we assign meaning to behavior by ascribing motives and causes.

ANALYZE THIS: The Deceptiveness of Appearance

In “Childhood,” by Frances Cornford, a child’s initial perception of old age matures:

I used to think that grown-up people chose

To have stiff backs and wrinkles round their nose,

And veins like small fat snakes on either hand,

On purpose to be grand.

Till through the banisters I watched one day

My grand-aunt Etty’s friend who was going away.

And how her onyx beads had come unstrung.

I saw her grope to find them as they rolled;

And then I knew that she was helplessly old,

As I was helplessly young.

How do you account for the change in the child’s perception? Why is it

189

possible to perceive a person, situation, or event one way at a particular point in time and differently at another point in time? What happened that led the child to discover that what she or he saw at one point in time did not tell the entire story?

Identify challenges that stand in the way of your accurately evaluating people, situations, or events. What steps can you take personally to ensure that what you see in a person, situation, or event is not limited to what you are looking for?

SOURCE: Frances Cornford, “Childhood,” in Frances Cornford: Selected Poems, ed. Jane Dowson. London: Enitharmon Press, 1996. Reprinted by permission.

We use four principles to guide us when we attribute behavior to a particular cause: consensus, consistency, distinctiveness, and controllability. When using the first principle, consensus, we consider commonalities of behavior. For instance, we might ask a question such as “Do the friends of my friend also speak with different accents when they are at home as opposed to when they are at work?” If the answer is yes, we are more apt to decide that the exhibited behavior has an external cause.

When focusing on consistency to make an attribution, we focus on repeated behavior. For example, if our friend is chronically late for every meal, then there is high behavioral consistency, and we are more apt to attribute the behavior to internal causes.

When focusing on distinctiveness, we ask if the person displays similar behavior in different situations. If the answer is yes, we are likely to conclude the behavior has an internal cause.

Finally, when focusing on controllability, we are seeking to determine if the person’s behavior was or was not under his or her control. For example, if someone is flying in to see you and is delayed because of a mechanical problem with the airplane, the delay was not under her control. She could not have gotten there any faster.

Fundamental attribution error: The overemphasis of internal or personal factors.

A common error in making attributions is that of assuming that the

190

primary motivation for behavior is in the person, not in the person’s situation, a tendency known as the fundamental attribution error. When, for example, a friend disappoints us by failing to arrive for a surprise party, we are more apt to conclude that the friend is inconsiderate or does not care than to believe that external factors interfered with his or her ability to attend. We overemphasize internal factors or personality traits, and we de-emphasize or discount the role played by the situation or factors external to the person.27

Things change dramatically, however, when we provide reasons for our own behavior. In offering reasons for why we behave as we do, we overemphasize external factors and downplay internal ones. This tendency, known as the self-serving bias, functions as a barrier to accurate perception while, at the same time, it helps to raise our own self-esteem during the self-attribution process. We take credit for the positive while denying culpability for the negative. Instead, we attribute the negative to factors beyond our control.

Another perceptual barrier is overattribution—the attributing of everything an individual does to a single or a few specific characteristics. For example, we may ascribe a person’s alcohol use, preference for certain kinds of friends, and lack of interest in close relationships to the fact that she or he was sexually abused when young.

When it comes to human beings, accounting for behavior can be complex. To understand our own behavior and that of others, we need to do our best to make accurate, reasoned attributions rather than excuse or blame ourselves or other persons based on habitual attribution biases.

FRAMEWORKS OF PERCEPTION

The mental templates and life experiences we bring to any situation strongly affect how we process experience and relate to others. How we organize what we know and the patterns of thought we characteristically display, referred to as schemata, when combined with our preconceived ideas or sets and selectivities along with two other constructs, ethnocentrism and stereotyping, define our perceptions and reveal our perceptual vulnerabilities. What is more, we often enact our perceptions without any conscious awareness.

191

SCHEMATA Schemata are the mental templates of characteristics that influence our notions or ideas about other people. Four perceptual schemata, or cognitive frameworks, help us decide what others are like and whether we would like to get to know them better:

1. Physical constructs enable us to classify people according to their physical characteristics, including age, weight, and height.

2. Interaction constructs point us toward their social behavior cues; for example, are they friendly, arrogant, aloof?

3. Role constructs focus on their social position; for example, are they professors, students, administrators?

4. Psychological constructs lead us to classify people according to such things as their generosity, insecurity, shyness, and sense of humor.

Which of these schemata are you conscious of using when you first meet someone?

Self-serving bias: The overemphasizing of external factors as influences on one’s behavior.

Overattribution: The attributing of everything an individual does to a single or a few specific characteristics.

PERCEPTUAL SETS AND SELECTIVITIES Each of us learns to make sense of the world by organizing the stimuli we perceive uniquely. The lessons that our family, friends, and culture teach us condition us to perceive stimuli in set ways, effectively helping us to construct our social reality. These organizational constructions are known as perceptual sets and selectivities; they are established gradually over time and help us decide which stimuli we should attend to. For example, if we are raised in a family that values education, we are likely to perceive learning-related activities more positively than we would if we had been raised in a family that dismisses education as unimportant. Likewise, if we grow up in a home where a particular religious or ethnic group is consistently demeaned, we would be more likely to believe in that group’s inferiority.28 Because past lessons and experiences are part of us at every new encounter, our past influences our interpretations and evaluations of the present.

192

REFLECT ON THIS: Attribution Theory

Our tendency to overestimate or attribute another’s behavior to dispositional variables while underestimating the impact of existing situational or environmental variables is supported by research. Can you show how this works?

1. Use attribution theory and the fundamental attribution error to provide a rationale that accounts for the following lines from a speech by the Reverend Jesse Jackson: Most poor people are not lazy. They catch the early bus. They raise other people’s children. They clean the streets. No, no, they’re not lazy.

2. Using your understanding of the nature of perception, explain this statement: We find causes where we look for them. Then, draw an example from personal experience to illustrate the statement’s meaning.

SOURCE: See, for example, Jessica Li Yexin, Katherine A. Johnson, Adam B. Cohen, Melissa J. Williams, Eric D. Knowles, and Chen Zhansheng, “Fundamental(ist) Attribution Error: Protestants Are Dispositionally Focused,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 2012, p. 281–290; and Didier Truchot, Gwladys Maure, and Sonia Patte, “Do Attributions Change over Time When the Actor’s Behavior Is Hedonically Relevant to the Perceiver?,” Journal of Social Psychology, 143, 2003, p. 202–208.

Education and culture are also variables that influence our perception, helping us make sense of our environment by selecting stimuli significant to us. For example, American culture supports the open expression of

193

opinion, whereas in Japanese culture, talk is not necessarily viewed as good and may be considered a sign of shallowness.29 Therefore, an American may perceive long silences to be embarrassing and uncomfortable, but a Japanese person accepts periods of silence as perfectly normal. Culture helps to condition us to communicate in distinctive ways. As you will see later in this chapter, it also influences our communication preferences and styles.

Like education and culture, our motivation or internal state also causes us to exhibit our own perceptual selectivities or preferences. For instance, just as thirsty people lost in the desert tend to see water mirages, so hungry people are more apt to see food before their eyes when shown a series of ambiguous pictures than are individuals who are full. Similarly, our financial position can influence our positive or negative perceptions of matters such as the U.S. welfare system and clothing fads.

Perceptual sets and selectivities: Organizational constructions that condition a readiness to perceive, or a tendency to interpret stimuli in ways to which one has been conditioned.

TRY THIS: Lessons Learned 1. To better understand the concept of perceptual sets, quickly read

the statements that appear in the following triangles:

2. After you have read them, examine each written statement more carefully. Did you notice the second the or a in each statement the first time? Because we are conditioned to see words in groups or clusters and not to read individual words, we can actually fail to see what is before our eyes. With the understanding that there is more to perception than meets the eye, what lessons about social perception can you draw from this experience?

3. How do preconceptions or prejudgments (perceptual sets) affect your ability to relate to others? For example, how might your

194

judging a person to be hostile rather than congenial affect your assessment of behavior the person displays that others might see as ambiguous?

ETHNOCENTRISM AND STEREOTYPES Ethnocentrism is the tendency to perceive what is right or wrong, good or bad, according to the categories and values of our own culture. When we are ethnocentric, we mentally formulate categorizations that make up the perceptions that are familiar and comfortable to our “in-group” and apply categorizations that are unfamiliar and awkward to an “out-group.”

While such a process can help us make sense of our world, it also can cause us to narrow our perceptions and use a rigid repertoire of behaviors dependent on the taking of perceptual shortcuts, or the use of stereotypes that reduce our communication effectiveness.

Similarly, stereotypes are “rigid perceptions which are applied to all members of a group or to an individual over a period of time, regardless of individual variations.”30 Once generalizations become rigid stereotypes, they actually contribute to our losing touch with the real world. Such stereotypes share two key characteristics: (1) they lead us to categorize others on the basis of easily recognized, but not necessarily significant, qualities (for example, noticing a person’s ethnicity before anything else, and (2) they lead us to ascribe an array of qualities to most or all members of a group (for example, assuming that all persons of Asian descent are soft-spoken and shy). When our generalizations harden, we are likely to disregard any differences in individuals that set them apart from the stereotyped group.

Stereotyping and racial profiling have the potential to plague both interracial and intercultural communication. On the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Geoffrey Canada, educator and president of Harlem Children’s Zone, offered an example of what can happen drawn from his observations and reflections on 9/11:

I don’t think many other communities experienced what we experienced in Harlem. We began to have African-American kids beating up Muslim kids, and it shocked all of us. African-American

195

kids thought they were committing some act of patriotism. We began to reach out to the community of those from Northern Africa who live around 125th Street who are mostly Muslim, and create relationships so those folks weren’t looking at each other through the prism of stereotypes and wouldn’t automatically assume this was a bad person. And that work has continued as these young people have been growing up, [to offset] these sort of messages that they receive via the media, where they’re constantly being bombarded with terrorism being connected to Islam. We, as a community, live side by side.31

Ethnocentrism: The tendency to perceive what is right or wrong, good or bad, according to the categories and values of one’s own culture.

Perceptual shortcuts: The kinds of perceptions exhibited by lazy perceivers who rely on stereotypes to help them make sense of experience.

Stereotypes: Rigid perceptions that are applied to all members of a group or to an individual over a period of time, regardless of individual variations.

Racial profiling: A form of stereotyping attributed to racism.

True or False 4. Dividing people into in- and out-groups improves perceptual accuracy. False. Dividing peopler into in- and out-groups leads to stereotyping.

When we stereotype instead of responding to the communication or cues of individuals, we create expectations, assume they are valid, and behave as if they have already occurred. We judge people on the basis of what we believe regarding the group in which we have placed them. We emphasize similarities and overlook differences. Stereotyping leads us to oversimplify, generalize, and grossly exaggerate our observations.

196

Sometimes we find ourselves in situations requiring that we make decisions based on little information other than appearance. Unfortunately, in addition to making clothing-trait associations, we also are prone to making “feature-trait associations,” relying on physical appearance to make judgments regarding both the categories people belong to and the traits they possess. While we may believe we are responding to a specific person, what we are really acting on is a stereotype. For example, for many years certain physical features—dark skin, coarse hair, full lips, and a wide nose—signaled to some people that a person was African American. This was a stereotype that produced a stereotypic judgment. And the more “Afrocentric” an individual’s features, the more he or she was ascribed traits stereotypical of African Americans.32 Colorism researchers report that more prejudice and discrimination are directed against dark-skinned African Americans than against light-skinned African Americans; the latter are more likely to have better jobs and to attain higher levels of education than those with darker skin.33 Researchers caution that although we may see more African American lawyers and doctors in prime-time television offerings, those characters are lighter skinned than the African Americans who are featured in broadcast/cable news shows as less exemplary characters.

Lazy perceivers rely on stereotyping as their key perceptual process. Because it discourages careful observation and encourages pigeonholing, stereotyping encourages categorization, leading some to observe that stereotyping brings on a malady called “hardening of the categories.” When we suffer from such a malady, we insist on having everyone fit into a particular niche, and we fail to recognize that every person is unique in some way and in fact constitutes his or her own category.

Together, schemata, sets and selectivities, and ethnocentrism and stereotypes play major parts in structuring our perceptions. By recognizing their roles and understanding their potential effects, we can prepare ourselves to question whether we are processing experience accurately and are thinking critically and reflectively about the judgments we form.

BARRIERS TO ACCURATE PERCEPTION

In addition to ethnocentrism and stereotypes, a number of other barriers can interfere with our developing accurate perception by causing us to behave unreflectively—that is, to act only on the basis of our personal

197

interests, make erroneous assumptions, and so forth. Perhaps the best way to eliminate such barriers is to learn to recognize them in our behavior.

REFLECT ON THIS: Stereotypes

Jerry Bembry, a sports journalist and senior writer at ESPN, described the following incident that happened more than two decades ago. In your opinion, could something similar happen today? Is there such a thing as a positive stereotype?

At a basketball media day at the Naval Academy, a ranking Navy official was greeting the news media. Each journalist received a gracious hello, but when the Navy man got to me, I was asked a question.

“So,” the official said, extending his hand. “Where did you play ball at to get this job?”

His assumption: Because I’m an athletic-looking African- American male, my education must have come in combination with an athletic scholarship. It’s a question I’m often asked, although I’ve never played collegiate sports.

No matter how many times such instances happen to me, it’s unsettling.

Unfortunately, incidents attributed to racial profiling do still occur. Many observers question such developments as “stand your ground” laws and law enforcement “stop and frisk” policies because of the dangers of racial profiling.

SOURCE: Jerry Bembry, “The Pain That Whites Don’t See,” The Record, January 23, 1994, p. E3.

Among the factors that can interfere with accurate perception are the following:

198

1. The failure to recognize the influence of age 2. The failure to distinguish facts from inferences 3. The tendency to think we know it all 4. The penchant for indiscrimination 5. The tendency to freeze our evaluations 6. The tendency to respond to events or persons with snap judgments 7. The wearing of blinders 8. The tendency to judge others more harshly than we judge ourselves

We explore each in turn below.

AGE AND PERSON PERCEPTION Throughout the life span, we continually change age-group memberships. How old we are at any point in time influences our perceptions of other people.34 When we are younger, category-based processing may affect our attitudes toward an individual we identify as belonging to the category of older adults, for example. In contrast, if we are older and view the target individual as similar to ourselves, rather than rely on stereotypic category- based processing, we may rely on person-based processing. Such processing reduces the influence of group attitudes on our perceptual judgments and helps explain why older people, in comparison with people in other age groups, have more complex perceptions of people their age. Because older persons are likely to be more familiar with persons in their age group, they are motivated to use person-based processing when forming impressions of members of their group.35

Category-based processing: The processing of information about a person that is influenced by attitudes toward the group into which the person is placed.

Person-based processing: The processing of information about a person based on perceptions of the individual, not on his or her membership in a particular group.

TRY THIS: The Appearance Factor Imagine yourself in the following situation:

199

You work on campus in one of the chemistry labs from 6:00 p.m. until midnight. It is late in your shift, and you are alone. You are a bit more nervous than usual because there has been an increase in campus crime and students have been warned to travel in pairs. You are relieved when midnight comes and you can close the lab and go home. As you are about to lock the door to the lab, you hear someone yell, “Wait! Don’t lock the door!” A person runs down the hall toward you and pleads with you to let him in so that he can complete his work on a class project that is due in the morning. He isn’t carrying any student ID; he tells you that he forgot it in his haste to get to the lab. You don’t recognize him. Do you trust what he is telling you? Do you let him in?

Would you respond differently if the person were a female? If he or she were elderly? Asian? Latino? Muslim? Dressed shabbily? Wearing designer clothes? Explain your answers.

True or False 5. “The sun will rise tomorrow” technically is not a statement of fact.

True. Because tomorrow’s sunrise has not yet been observed, “The sun will rise tomorrow” is an inference.

Young people have the highest level of anxiety about aging.36 As a result, younger people tend to place older adults into a number of different stereotypes and are likely to perceive them more negatively than they view young and middle-aged adults. Older people, in contrast, have more positive attitudes about their own aging process and perceive other older adults as exhibiting more instrumentality and autonomy. While this may

200

be due to an in-group favoritism effect, the same effect may explain why younger people rate characteristics of people their own age more favorably than do older people.

Gender also affects attitudes toward age. Young women who attribute any negative attitudes toward older people to their own fear of aging tend to stereotype older people less than do other women. In contrast, young men who consider their own fears about aging stereotype older people more than do other men. This may be attributed to the fact that men and women have different mental representations for aging.37

FACT-INFERENCE CONFUSIONS A fact is something we know is true on the basis of observation. Your hair color is brown, for example. An inference is simply a conclusion we draw, whether or not it is supported by facts. If you assume your neighbor is having an affair based solely on the fact that an unfamiliar car comes to her house every few days for an hour or so, you are making an inference.

When we mistake what we infer for something we have observed, we experience fact-inference confusion. Inferences have varying degrees of probability of being correct; their validity depends on the facts that underlie them. For instance, “The sun will rise tomorrow” is not technically a statement of fact; it is an inference with a very high probability of being correct. In contrast, if you see a friend talking and laughing with another person and you conclude that the two of them are hooking up, that would be an inference with average to low probability of being correct, because you cannot verify it based on your observations to this point.

Fact-inference confusion: The tendency to treat observations and assumptions similarly.

Inferences, like assumptions, can have serious consequences for our relationships. They can cause us to jump to erroneous conclusions, create embarrassing moments, and result in our responding inappropriately to others. Thus, we need to take time to evaluate whether we are relying on facts or on inferences when we perceive and interpret another’s behavior. The question is not whether we make inferences but whether we are aware of the inferences we make. If we are aware that we are inferring and not observing, and we can accurately assess the degree of probability that our

201

inferences are correct, we take a giant step forward in improving our perceptions.

TRY THIS: Can You Tell the Difference? First, to test your understanding of facts and inferences, read the following brief story and the statements that follow it. If you think a statement is true, circle T; if you think it is false, circle F. For an inference that might be either true or false, circle the question mark. (Answers appear below at the bottom of this box.)

You arrive at school one day and see that a number of police cars and an ambulance are parked at the front gate of the campus. Also parked there is a car with “Dr. Smythe” on the license plate.

Then consider this: fiction and drama frequently revolve around stories based on fact-inference confusion. Think of a TV show, film, or novel plot that is held together by fact-inference confusion. Analyze what occurs in the show, film, or novel, and describe what the involved characters could have done or said to avoid it.

Answers: 1. T; 2. ?; 3. ?; 4. F; 5. ?

ALLNESS Allness, or thinking that we can know all there is to know about a person, place, or situation, is an attitude that some people carry with them from one relationship to another. Those who “know it all” mistakenly think they can know everything. They exhibit very little tolerance for ambiguity, which causes them to display an unwillingness to withhold judgment.

Thinking we know it all limits our ability to perceive accurately. When we insist that our viewpoint alone is correct, we in effect are saying that any differing perceptions are incorrect. We would be wiser to open ourselves

202

to alternative ways of perceiving. To correct a tendency toward allness, we could add an implied “et cetera” to each of our perceptions— acknowledging that there is more to be known than what we see.

INDISCRIMINATION When we fail to discriminate among individuals, we may end up discriminating against an individual. When this occurs, we exhibit indiscrimination.38 In other words, the more we are discriminating and look for differences in all individuals, the less likely it is that we will be prejudiced against the members of any one group or treat people belonging to these groups unfairly.

Accurate perception depends on our being able to identify differences, not just recognize similarities. Too frequently, however, just the opposite happens, increasing our tendency to stereotype. If you remind yourself that no two people are absolutely alike, that every person is unique, your ability to perceive each as an individual will improve.

Using stereotypes as the basis for social exchanges often leads to miscommunication. Too frequently, the way stereotypes play out in behavior leads us to decide that we do not like or approve of someone before we have even gotten to know her or him. Again, our expectations influence our judgments.

Allness: A perceptual fallacy that allows a person to believe that he or she knows everything about something.

Indiscrimination: A perceptual barrier that causes one to emphasize similarities and neglect differences.

ANALYZE THIS: IS That All There Is?

203

Explain how this poem by John Godfrey Saxe helps illustrate the perceptual fallacy of allness.

It was six men of Indostan To learning much inclined

Who went to see the Elephant (Though all of them were blind).

That each by observation Might satisfy his mind.

The First approached the Elephant, And happening to fall

Against his broad and sturdy side, At once began to bawl:

“God bless me! But the Elephant Is very like a wall.”

The Second, feeling of the tusk Cried, “Ho! What have we here

So very round and smooth and sharp? To me ’tis very clear

This wonder of an Elephant Is very like a spear.”

The Third approached the animal And, happening to take

The squirming trunk within his hands,

204

Thus boldly up he spake:

“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant Is very like a snake!”

The Fourth reached out an eager hand, And fell about the knee;

“What most this wondrous beast is like

Is very plain,” quoth he; “Tis clear enough the

Elephant Is very like a tree!”

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,

Said: “E’en the blindest man

Can tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can

This marvel of an Elephant Is very like a fan!”

The Sixth no sooner had begun About the beast to grope

Than seizing on the swinging tail That fell within his scope:

“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant Is very like a rope!”

And so these men of Indostan Disputed loud and long,

Each in his own opinion Exceeding stiff and strong.

Though each was partly in the right, They all were in the wrong!a

205

1. What does the poem suggest regarding the dangers of allness? 2. How, in your estimation, does allness affect future evaluations?

Explain.

SOURCE: John Godfrey Saxe, “The Blind Men and the Elephant,” 1872.

Frozen evaluation: A perceptual fallacy that discourages flexibility and encourages rigidity; an evaluation of a person that ignores changes.

FROZEN EVALUATIONS AND SNAP JUDGMENTS When we assume that situations and people stay the way they are, always, we make frozen evaluations. “Once a poor student,” we think, “always a poor student.” “Once a thief,” we reason, “always a thief.” Such statements fail to acknowledge that people can change. If our perception does not permit us to be flexible, but freezes our judgment instead, then we fail in perceiving the constant change that characterizes all of us.

To avoid making such fallacious perceptions, we should date every perception we acknowledge. Doing so will also help prevent us from clinging to our first impressions. Initial perceptions need not be permanent. In fact, maintaining an open mind should be a goal if we are to develop more valid assessments of experience. For example, consider the following initial impression and subsequent reevaluation of perception:

206

Has an instructor ever made a snap judgment about you?

For years I had seen octopuses as terrible, evil creatures that were intent on grabbing swimmers with their tentacles and dragging them under water to be crushed and drowned.

Now I perceive them as being gentle, inoffensive,intelligent creatures who enjoy playful contacts with swimmers.

Probably I have changed my perceptions of octopuses because of changes in the filters of past experience and mind-set. My early experiences were reading horror stories and seeing horror movies. My mind-set was to believe, as truth, what I read and saw in those media. Also I wanted to believe the horrible stories were true because that enhanced my enjoyment. Later experiences were seeing undersea

207

documentaries by Cousteau and reading books by him. My mind-set now is that I respect what scientists tell me and I expect that they will give me accurate accounts of their research. I saw a movie of one of Cousteau’s divers doing a little ballet dance with an octopus he had made friends with. Then I saw the octopus and the diver embrace affectionately as they parted. I also read about a young woman biologist who has made friends with giant octopuses near Seattle. She tickles them and they love it.39

Can you think of an experience in your life that led you to form an initial impression that you subsequently changed? For example, you might have believed that a disheveled person seen frequently on a street neighboring your campus was homeless until you discovered that a building at the college was named for him. How challenging is it for you to reevaluate a first impression?

Just as we are apt to make frozen evaluations, we similarly display snap judgments, or make instant decisions. In the rush to give meaning to our perceptions, instead of delaying our responses we jump to conclusions, displaying instantaneous and reflexlike—but often incorrect or even dangerous—responses. For example, if we see a friend talking with a police officer, we may rush to judgment and conclude that the officer was giving him a ticket. Accurate perception usually takes time. Better perceivers do not rush to respond; rather, they try to synthesize as many data as possible, explore alternative evaluations of the an situation, and thus increase their chances of understanding what is really going on.

Snap judgment: An evaluation made without reflection; an undelayed reaction.

BLINDERING

What we tell ourselves about what we perceive can also limit our ability to perceive accurately. In effect, the act of blindering—that is, forcing ourselves to see people and situations only in certain ways, as though we are wearing blinders—keeps us from seeing who or what is really before our eyes.

Accurate perception depends on the ability to see what is there without being limited by imaginary restrictions or boundaries. When, for example,

208

scientists stopped searching for the cause of malaria in the air (the word malaria comes from the Italian for “bad air”) and looked for other causes, they soon traced the origin of the disease to the Anopheles mosquito and were then able to find a cure. The following exercise can help you understand the concept of blindering: Draw four straight lines to connect all of the dots below, without lifting your pencil or pen from the page or retracing a line.

Most people have difficulty completing this exercise because they add a restriction that is not actually there—they assume the figure is a square. (See the solution at the end of this chapter.)

JUDGING OTHERS MORE HARSHLY THAN OURSELVES Point your finger at a person near you. The gesture feels natural, doesn’t it? Now point that same finger at yourself. That doesn’t feel quite so natural, does it?

Related to the self-serving bias discussed earlier in this chapter, when perceptual disagreements arise, we tend to assume that the problem in perceiving lies with the other person, rather than with ourselves. We are quite comfortable evaluating our perceptual capabilities more charitably than we judge those of others.

When asked to compare their ability to communicate with that of their peers, parents, professors, significant others, or siblings, most people report communicating at least as well as if not better than others. Thus, whenever communication goes awry, that finger points outward—directly at another person—rather than inward to the self. We shift responsibility for communication problems and perceptual distortions away from ourselves and place it with others with whom we have relationships.

DIVERSITY AND CULTURE: INTERPRETING THROUGH DIFFERENT I’S

209

We are likely to persist in seeing the world not necessarily as it is but as we have been conditioned to perceive it. Culture and past experience create in us a quest for perceptual constancy—it is easier for us to keep seeing things as we have in the past than it is to revise our perceptions.

The more similar our life experiences, the more similarly we tend to perceive things. The more dissimilar our life experiences, the wider the gap between us with respect to how we see and make sense of things. Not everyone makes sense out of experience in the same way. Cultural habits or selectivities ensure that.

Blindering: The unconscious adding of restrictions that do not actually exist.

The members of every culture develop particular cultural perspectives or ways of looking at the world. As we have noted, most Americans perceive it to be important to express their uniqueness and independence, whereas in Asian cultures, the group and not the individual is paramount. These contrasting orientations have implications for interpersonal communication. American children are taught to separate from their parents and develop self-reliance, but in cultures that value interdependence over dependence, cooperation, helpfulness, and loyalty are nurtured instead. Thus, persons from these cultures tend to have more close-knit relationships and expect more from others.

We see such differences play themselves out in how we process information as well. The Japanese, for example, develop a wider-angle view of experience than do Americans. They do not see themselves as being at the center of the universe. When students at the University of Michigan and Kyoto University were shown animation of an underwater scene with a “focal fish” and other fish swimming among an array of undersea objects, the Japanese students made more references to the background elements, while the Americans focused on the “focal fish.” Americans believe that each person has a separate identity that needs to be reinforced. They value the ethic of competition, the need to be number one. This orientation can cause difficulty for Americans when they need to interact with persons from other cultures who do not share this value and may perceive it as threatening to them.

Culture teaches us a worldview, influencing our assessments of reality.

210

Whether we are judging beauty, evaluating the meaning of success, or reacting to someone’s age, culture plays a role. In the United States, for example, we have a culture that values youth and rejects the notion of growing old. Persons in Muslim, Asian, Latin American, Native American, and African cultures do not share this perception. Individuals from different cultures are simply trained to observe the same cues differently; we all interpret what we perceive through a cultural lens. Some years ago, researchers used an apparatus resembling binoculars to compare the perceptual preferences of Native Americans and Mexicans. Each subject in the study was shown ten pairs of photographs; one photo in each pair was of an element of Native American culture and one was of Mexican culture. After viewing the paired images through the device, the subjects reported their observations. Results revealed that both the Native American and the Mexican subjects were more likely to report having seen scenes from their own culture.40

Race also influences perception. When it comes to views on how much progress we have made since the days of the civil rights movement, a racial divide still exists. For example, when asked who will be hired, whites perceive a level playing field, whereas African Americans believe that discrimination persists. A majority (52 percent) of African Americans, compared with 15 percent of white Americans, believe the United States needs to enact new civil right laws to reduce discrimination.41 How might such disparate perceptions affect relationships between white people and black people in the United States?

Because we have not all experienced the same life lessons, even within cultures we may not attribute the same meanings to the same sets of conditions or behavioral cues. If we are to relate effectively to one another, we need to take steps to eliminate cultural nearsightedness.

GENDER AND PERCEPTION

Would you see things differently if you were of the opposite sex? Gender, like culture, influences the way we make sense of our experiences. Men and women are conditioned to perceive different realities, are encouraged to perform in different ways, and prefer to use different communication styles. In addition to influencing how men and women perceive one another, beliefs about gender-appropriate behavior influence how we relate to each other.

211

Cultural lens: The influence of culture on perception.

Lisbeth Salander, the heroine of the novel and movie The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, has an appearance that challenges conventional images of leading female characters.

From early childhood, both boys and girls are rewarded for using behaviors that conform to their gender; for example, boys are commended for displaying strength and independence, whereas girls are praised for expressing their feelings and being kind to others. We even categorize them differently—men as rational and women as emotional.42

As a result of interacting with parents, teachers, peers, and others, we internalize the lessons of appropriate gendered behavior. Such lessons instruct us in how society would like us to behave, framing our perceptions. These constructs, however, can limit how each of us is perceived and may lead to the judging of men and women based on gender expectations rather than on observed cues.

Others’ expectations, role model behavior, and stereotyped notions of sex roles reinforce “acceptable” images of male and female behavior. For perceptions of the kinds of behavior appropriate for men and women to change, the messages that institutions, the media, and society feed us need to change.

In addition, we continually monitor ourselves. We sort stimuli, selecting

212

some and rejecting others. The information we store in our internal database helps us build our view of reality and gives our lives a sense of stability. For example, if we develop the perspective that men are persistently more dominant than women, then we use that belief to categorize both genders and predict their actions. However, when our expectations cause us to misperceive others and their intentions, undesirable consequences can result. All too frequently, rigid categorizing creates communication problems and precipitates interpersonal fiascoes.

As thinking men and women, we do not have to accept all the gender prescriptions our culture provides. We can reject those that limit our development, and in doing so we can elicit changes in the behavior of others toward us. When we refuse to support a gender-based definition, we in effect participate in redefinition. For example, when one woman encourages another to be more autonomous, she may help that woman to expand her definition of behaviors appropriate for women. As women change their behavior and roles, men may perceive both women and themselves differently and may change as well. In the process, we recast the meanings of masculinity and femininity.

Gender prescriptions: The roles and behaviors that a culture assigns to males and females.

THE MEDIA, TECHNOLOGY, AND PERCEPTION

The media and technology also influence how we perceive social experience. For better or worse, they have the ability to radically change our views of reality. By being mindful of where our perceptions come from—aware of how both media and technology affect our processing of the self, each other, and events—we can better understand and improve our perceptual accuracy.

THE MEDIA AND PERCEPTION Because the mass media tend to depict us in ways that reinforce cultural views of race, culture, and gender, the more time we spend with the media, the more accepting we tend to become of social stereotypes, and the more likely we are to help perpetuate the unrealistic and limiting perceptions presented to us.

How do stereotypes in media influence our expectations and relationships?

213

First, they help us identify and generalize about what we consider to be appropriate behavior. They offer us categories into which people fit, and they provide us with an array of models in action so that when similar situations arise we think we know how to deal with them. Second, they provide us with perceptual shortcuts; they cause us to forget that we communicate with individuals, not stereotypes, and they contribute to our becoming lazy perceivers—too accepting of the inaccurate or false images presented to us.

What are some of the specific lessons we learn from the media that help shape our perceptions of gender? One lesson, which we glean from the significant underrepresentation of women and older people in leading roles in the media, is that males matter more than women (and younger males matter most) and that women and older people are either not as important or potentially invisible. Even in news programming, stories about men outnumber stories about women.

A second media lesson involves our internalization of stereotypic portrayals of gender. Whereas media offerings present men as active, independent, powerful, and sexually virile, they portray women as the objects of males’ sexual desires, incompetent, manipulative, and passive. The media focus on women’s looks and their relationships with family members and others. Women are caregivers. Men are typically portrayed taking care of business. They are depicted as providers.

A third lesson concerns the extent to which the media lead us to perceive minority groups inappropriately. Minorities occupy an even smaller media presence than women, for the most part being cast in supporting, not leading, roles and depicted as lazy, unlawful, and dumb, or, in the case of Muslims, as terrorists. Even positive portrayals are based in stereotypes: the media tend to pigeonhole the Asian character as “the smart one” or the African American as “the magical African American friend.” African American film director Spike Lee has pointed out the stock character of the “Magical Negro,” who serves merely as an enabler to a white character, and comedy sketches featuring such a role have aired on Saturday Night Live.

The media also influence our perception by molding our conceptions of the real world and people in ways that are inconsistent with facts. As cultivation theory would predict, for example, heavy television viewers are more likely than those who view little TV to be fearful and to exaggerate

214

the amount of violence in the world.43 Heavy viewers perceive the world to be meaner and a more dangerous place.44 Research demonstrates that by distorting our perception of risk, the media induce in us a sense of fear that is out of proportion with any actual danger.45 In other words, the media are virtually capable of scaring us to death. Such perceptions affect real-life judgments of what is safe, whom we should fear, and whom we are safe with. What steps can you take to counteract the false sense of reality brought to you by media?

Media lessons, which appear to weave their way innocuously into our consciousness, also function to limit our perceptions of ourselves in relation to each other, and, what is worse, they often cause us to misperceive reality. As they perpetuate what is unreal and untrue (even on so-called reality shows), they encourage us to reach for what is impossible. Because we use the media as reference points for what is normal, we are more likely to perceive ourselves, our relationships, and our lives as inferior by comparison. The media present the human body in perfect form and convince us that no one could love us the way we actually are, thus causing us to develop negative images of ourselves. The media’s unreal images perpetuate in us unrealistic perceptions of what our lives should be like and cause us to internalize and anticipate unreasonable outcomes from relationships.

TECHNOLOGY AND PERCEPTION Like media in general, technology is altering self-perception as well as perception of other people and the world. For example, how do we perceive the social connections we have online? Do we see them as pulling us closer into new kinds of communities, or pulling us apart by their ability to separate us from more local, personal interactions? Are we reproducing real social interactions online or creating something altogether different? Is the ease with which we can link with others who share the same interests and goals and confirm our way of thinking creating communities of sameness? Are we sacrificing serendipity for a false sense of companionship?

When online, we also make judgments relative to other persons’ cultures or gender. According to the social identity model of de-individuation effects (known as SIDE), we have different identities that make themselves visible in different situations.46 When we interact online, the

215

lack of nonverbal cues, especially those related to appearance and sound, cause us to hold on more tightly to what we know about the other person’s group affiliations.47 This could compel us to become more judgmental, to make overattributions (that is, single out one or two characteristics of a person), or to exaggerate the importance of the minimal information we have. We practice closure, often filling in the gaps by using stereotypes. If we assume that people share social categories with us, making them like us, we tend to find them more likable than if we believe they are different.

Violent video games have both positive and negative effects on players. How do they affect you?

Technology is changing us in other ways, too. Playing violent games online increases aggressive behavior by causing people to perceive annoying provocations as more hostile.48 The games also expand the repertoire of aggressive behaviors of users and emotionally desensitize players to aggression and of violence.49 The effects of online gaming are not all negative, however. Playing action games can enhance an individual’s ability to pay attention to objects and changes in the environment. Experienced gamers are 30 to 50 percent better than nongamers at perceiving everything happening around them. It appears that gaming not only precipitates better spatial skills but also improves attention skills and facilitates the accurate understanding of a visual landscape.50

Social identity model of de-individuation effects: A theory that states

216

that each individual has different identities that make themselves visible in different situations.

On the other hand, some observers fear that, because of the vastness of the virtual landscape, interacting online may be limiting our perceptual focus by making it difficult for us to concentrate on any one thing for a sustained period of time. While we watch television, for example, we frequently also use a computing device of some kind to check e-mail, Web surf for information related to what we are watching, or exchange messages with others about what we are viewing.51 What is more, when we are online, we hurry from one stimulus to another, sneaking peeks at people and sites, paying scant attention to any.52 The Internet makes multidirectional pulls on our attention, demanding of us a different kind of attention than we are used to giving.53 In fact, it has been suggested that the distractions caused by social media could cost a company with a thousand workers more than $10 million a year.54

The Internet is also affecting how we remember. We pay more attention to and are more likely to remember information if we think we will not be able to find it later. For many, the Internet is becoming a primary system for information storage. We have found a new means of outsourcing memory.55

GAINING COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE: ENHANCING YOUR PERCEPTUAL ABILITIES

Your ability to relate to others is affected by how capable a perceiver you are. Understanding the part you play in perception, including how and why you perceive people and events as you do, is essential if you are to experience new and healthy relationships, minimize misunderstandings, and broaden your horizons. What steps can you take to improve your perceptual abilities?

RECOGNIZE THE PART YOU PLAY Because we are all unique, we each experience a reality that is somewhat different from that experienced by others. Until we acknowledge the part we play in perceiving and making sense of reality, we are apt to experience numerous relational and communication problems. Just because others

217

may not see the world the way we do does not mean their views are wrong. They are merely expressing alternative outlooks. Variations in physiological, psychological, and cultural factors lead us to adopt different perspectives and attribute difference meanings to experience. Perception is not something that happens to us. It is something we do.

You may like a person who seems similar to you and dislike someone who seems different. Your friend’s jokes may strike you as funny when you are in a good mood and tasteless when you are preoccupied with a personal problem. By taking stock of yourself, including your emotional state and biases, you accept responsibility for what you bring to the perception process.

BE A PATIENT PERCEIVER Because we tend to live at an accelerated pace in U.S. society, we may expect things to happen quickly. The emphasis we place on speed can diminish our ability to be patient, contributing to our jumping to conclusions. Patient perceivers, however, do not jump to conclusions, cling to first impressions, or believe they know it all. Instead, they open their minds to possibilities, look beyond the obvious, and genuinely attempt to check the accuracy of their interpretations.

TRY THIS: Facebook in Focus Peruse the walls of the Facebook pages of various friends. Then answer these questions:

1. To what extent does each wall contain clues that help others form an initial impression of each person?

2. If you know the person well, how does his or her wall reinforce or contradict your face-to-face perception?

Patient perceivers question their perceptual acuity. Ask yourself if there is any chance you could be wrong. By acknowledging that you might have made an error in judgment or misevaluated observed behavior, you motivate yourself to seek further validation. If you take the time and make

218

the effort either to verify your judgment or to prove yourself wrong, you increase your chances of forming more accurate impressions of others and of situations in which you find yourself.

BECOME A PERCEPTION CHECKER In order to avoid treating interpretations as if they were facts, develop the skill of perception checking. You can do this by relaying a nonevaluative descriptive statement of your observations; that is, observe the behavior of another, describe and interpret what his or her behavior means to you, and put your interpretation into words in the effort to determine if your perception is correct.

WATCH THIS 3.1 For a video on perception-checking visit the student study site.

For example, imagine you are a participant-observer of the following scene:

Leila walks into the classroom and flings her books down on the desk. As she takes her seat, you notice that her eyes are narrowed and her face is in a scowl. You are seated directly to her right. You quietly say to her, “Leila, I get the feeling that you’re angry about something. Am I right? Can I do anything to help?”

Making this initial statement followed by questions that assume nothing is better than asking, “Why are you angry with me?” (Who said she was?) Your goal as a perception checker is to explore Leila’s thoughts and feelings, not to prove that your interpretation of what you have observed is right. For example, in response Leila might state, “I’m not angry. I’m upset with myself for not getting the paper done on time.” By seeking verification of the impression you received from Leila’s nonverbal behavior and giving her the opportunity to share her thoughts and feelings, you reduce your uncertainty about what she is feeling as well as take some of the guesswork out of perception.

Keep in mind that perception checking works best with persons from low- context cultures. Typically, it involves straight talk and direct statements of observation. Persons from high-context cultures might become

219

embarrassed if they are asked so directly about their feelings and the meanings of their actions.

WIDEN YOUR PERCEPTION Keep the big picture in mind as perceptual clues surface. Avoid jumping to a conclusion based on a single piece of evidence. By cautiously assessing what is happening, you refrain from overattributing meaning to any single behavior or circumstance. While what you may see or hear first (primacy effect) or last (recency effect) may make a great impression on you, you need to search for more evidence so that you do not draw inaccurate conclusions based on the partial picture to which you have access.

SEE THROUGH THE EYES OF ANOTHER Try to exhibit empathy—that is, experience the world from behind the eyes of another person. This means you need to socially decenter, or take the focus off, yourself and place it on another by considering that person’s thoughts and feelings first. Doing this allows you insight into the other person’s state of mind and lets you see things from his or her perspective; by stepping into the other person’s shoes, you can re-create or vicariously experience what he or she is feeling, and thus develop emotional understanding. When you empathize you also engage in perspective taking —you develop a personal sense of what the person is going through. You imagine what it would be like to be in the person’s position. Can you imagine, for example, how your significant other feels when you forget his or her birthday? Can you sense how your supervisor feels when every few weeks you take a day off? While it is easier to feel empathy for those with whom we identify, it is equally important to be able to put yourself into the shoes of a person with whom you may have little in common. Do you find it easy to empathize with others? Some researchers fear that the ability to empathize is on the decline due to the preeminence of social media and its encouragement of self-promotion as opposed to other understanding.56 Do you believe their fear is justified?

BUILD PERCEPTUAL BRIDGES, NOT WALLS Although perceptual disagreements can drive us apart, if we exhibit a willingness to experience the world from another person’s perspective, we can enhance communication. Rather than argue over whose point of view is right or whose behavior is wrong, it is more productive to understand the factors that create differences in our interpretations and then work to adapt

220

to and bridge those differences.

CONSIDER HOW TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING HOW WE PERCEIVE Social transformations are taking place because of the amount of interaction we engage in online. It is important to think about and imagine how virtual interactions are affecting our desire for actual ones and vice versa. For example, consider the following: Could you go an entire day without sending a text message or checking Facebook? Are there times when you should actually speak on your cell phone instead of texting or converse face-to-face instead of posting online? And when posting, do you always consider who will have access to your words and photos and how others might perceive them?

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Dax’s Trial

Dax couldn’t believe what was happening. Would it never end? Dax had not been happy when he received the notice to report to the courthouse for jury duty. He was even less happy when he found that he had no valid reason to be excused from the obligation. The first day he reported, things went just fine. He was called as a member of a panel for a case, but the case was resolved quickly and the jury was dismissed. The second day he was not called during the morning session, so he was able to finish reading a novel. Then it all began. Dax was called for the jury selection phase of a murder trial. Before he knew it, he was on the jury and the trial had started. Two days into the trial, Dax began to wonder about the entire process.

221

Could each eyewitness called by both attorneysreally have seen the same thing? Twelve different witnesses had been called to testify about what had happened on the street corner where the murder had occurred. All twelve described different versions of the event. Was this possible? Could so many people not agree on what had happened? Dax wished he could have a chance to question the witnesses himself. Was each of them certain of his or her perception? To what degree did the relationship each did or did not share with the defendant or the victim influence the reports? Dax was really getting into the trial when the defendant changed his plea to guilty and the jury was dismissed. Though he was released from duty, Dax continued to mull over his confusion about witnesses’ perceptions.

Answer these questions:

1. Do you think several people observing one event will perceive it the same way? Why or why not?

2. What is there about the perception process that enables us to observe different realities?

3. How do you explain the differences in the testimony Dax heard at the trial? Do you think any or all of the twelve witnesses who testified lied?

REVIEW THIS CHAPTER SUMMARY

1 Explain the perception process and its relationship to reality. We do not all perceive reality similarly. Standpoint theory suggests that persons in positions of power have an overriding interest in preserving their place in the social hierarchy. Thus, our view of reality is a consequence of the person we are, where we are, and what we choose to see. Perception is the personally based process we use to make sense of experience. When we perceive, we select, organize, and interpret sensory data in an effort to make sense of and give meaning to our

222

world.

2 Define the figure-ground principle, closure, and perceptual constancy. These are the strategies we use to facilitate perceiving. The figure-ground principle addresses our tendency to focus on a particular person or item while the surrounding context becomes background— that is, we focus on different stimuli alternately. Closure is the process we use to fill in missing perceptual pieces or gaps. Perceptual constancy is our tendency to maintain the way we see the world.

3 Explain how schemata, perceptual sets and selectivities, and ethnocentrism and stereotypes influence perception. Schemata are cognitive frameworks, the mental templates or knowledge structures we carry with us. Perceptual sets and selectivities are organizational constructions that influence our readiness to perceive in predetermined ways; each set or selectivity helps us decide what stimulus to focus on and how to construct our social reality. Ethnocentrism is the tendency to perceive what is right or wrong, good or bad, according to the categories and values of one’s own culture A stereotype is a rigid perception that is applied to members of a group or to an individual over time regardless of individual variations.

4 Distinguish among the following perceptual barriers: fact-inference confusions, allness, indiscrimination, frozen evaluations, snap judgments, and blindering. Each of these makes it difficult for us to perceive people and events accurately. Fact-inference confusions cause us to confuse observations and assumptions. Allness leads us to think we know it all. Indiscrimination causes us to emphasize similarities and neglect differences. When we make frozen evaluations, we ignore change. Snap judgments lead us to jump to conclusions. Blindering causes us to add restrictions where none actually exist.

5 Discuss how culture, gender, and media and technology influence perceptions of social experience. Culture teaches us acceptable ways of looking at our world, as well as acceptable ways of behaving. Gender conditions men and women to perceive different realities, exhibit different behaviors, and use different communication styles. The media also influence our self-perception, as well as our perception of each other, and our social experiences. Because the media tend to reinforce cultural views of gender and ethnicity, they contribute to our becoming more accepting of social stereotypes. Technology is altering the way we

223

perceive social connection, changing our view of what is real, and enhancing our perceptual acuity.

6 Identify strategies you can use to enhance your perceptual abilities. To improve your chances of developing more accurate perceptions, you need to recognize the part you play in perception, develop patience, become a perception checker, see through others’ eyes, work to bridge perceptual differences, and carefully consider how technological innovations are affecting your perceptions.

CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING

1 Can you provide evidence of your own personal basis of perception? For example, what aspects of your environment are you attending to right now? (See pages 62–2.)

2 Can you offer examples showing how stereotypes have affected your judgments? What do you see as the ethical implications of stereotyping? (See pages 69–2.)

3 Can you describe instances when one or more barriers to perception impeded your response to another person or situation? (See pages 72– 2.)

4 Can you offer examples of how attitudes toward masculinity and femininity influence perception? How about media portrayals of race and ethnicity? (See pages 79–2.)

5 Can you describe steps you can take to develop your perceptual ability? In your opinion, is developing accurate perception a moral issue? (See pages 83–2.)

CHECK YOUR SKILLS

224

1 Can you use standpoint theory to account for your stance toward both wealth inequality and racism? (See page 63.)

2 Can you explain how uncertainty reduction theory helps to explain your behavior on the first day of a class? (See pages 63–2.)

3 Can you provide examples illustrating how selective perception influences your relationships? (See pages 64–2.)

4 Can you use your skills to work through perceptual differences? (See pages 65–2; and Analyze This, page 68.)

5 Can you use attribution theory to account for the rationales you offer to explain your own and another’s behavior? (See pages 67–2; and Reflect on This, page 70.)

6 Can you give examples of how perceptual schemata and sets and selectivities have influenced your reactions to people and situations? (See pages 69–2; and Try This, page 71.)

7 Can you document the impacts of stereotypes on you and on your relationships with others? (See pages 71–2; Reflect on This, page 73; and Try This, page 74.)

8 Can describe the steps you have taken to prevent perceptual barriers from adversely influencing your responses to people and situations? (See pages 72–2; Try This, pages 74 and 75; and Analyze This, page 76.) 9 Can you offer examples of the role cultural and gender preferences and media and technology play in your perception of others? (See pages 78–2; Reflect on This, page 73; and Try This, page 75.)

10 Can you use your skills to identify and respond to specific relationship challenges? (See The Case of Dax’s Trial, page 86.)

KEY TERMS

Standpoint theory 63

Perception 63

Uncertainty reduction theory 64

225

Selective perception 65

Selective exposure 65

Selective attention 65

Selective retention 65

Horn effect 65

Halo effect 65

Figure-ground principle 65

Closure 65

Perceptual constancy 66

Schemata 66

Scripts 66

Affectors 66

Attribution theory 67

Fundamental attribution error 68

Self-serving bias 69

Overattribution 69

Perceptual sets and selectivities 70

Ethnocentrism 71

Perceptual shortcuts 71

Stereotypes 71

Racial profiling 71

Category-based processing 73

Person-based processing 73

Fact-inference confusion 74

Allness 75

Indiscrimination 75

Frozen evaluation 76

Snap judgment 77

226

Blindering 78

Cultural lens 79

Gender prescriptions 80

Social identity model of de-individuation effects 82

STUDENT STUDY SITE

Visit the student study site at www.sagepub.com/gambleic to access the following materials:

• SAGE Journal Articles

• Videos

• Web Resources

• eFlashcards

• Web Quizzes

• Study Questions

Solution to Blindering Exercise

227

4Chapter

Most people never listen. Nor do they observe.

— Ernest Hemingway

LISTENING LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this chapter, you should be able to demonstrate mastery of the following learning outcomes:

228

1. Define and distinguish between hearing and listening. 2. Identify and explain the six stages of listening identified in the

HURIER model.

3. Define and distinguish among the four styles and four types of listening.

4. Compare and contrast the behaviors of effective and ineffective listeners.

5. Define the different kinds of feedback.

6. Explain how gender and culture influence listening.

7. Analyze the impacts of media and technology on listening.

tudents are known to engage in a number of different activities at the same time—even during class. Be honest. How often do you multitask while trying to listen to and absorb what your instructor or peers are sharing? Perhaps you browse the Web, secretly text a

friend, or monitor Facebook—all while listening to a lecture. But is it possible for you to listen effectively while distracted by such competing interests?

How often do you multitask while trying to listen to and absorb what your instructor or peers are sharing?

Studies have shown that if you multitask during class you may not be listening and absorbing as much as you think.1 While heavy multitaskers are the people most overconfident about their multitasking abilities, the research reveals that students who multitask during class do not perform as well as those who do not multitask but instead focus on absorbing the lesson.2 What is more, they often are completely unaware of what they have missed. Multitasking inhibits a person’s acquisition of a deep understanding of the information being presented. Concentrating on the task at hand, not multitasking and switching attention between tasks, facilitates effective listening and learning.3

229

WHAT DO YOU KNOW?

Before continuing your reading of this chapter, which of the following five statements do you believe to be true and which do you believe to be false?

1. Most of our waking time is spent listening. TF

2. If we can hear, we can listen. TF

3. We hear what we listen for. TF

If after a person tells you about a problem, you say, “It’s nothing; don’t even waste your time thinking about it,” you are helping to legitimate the other person’s feelings.

T F

5. A “red-flag word” is patriotic. TF

Read the chapter to discover if you’re right or if you’ve made any erroneous assumptions.

ANSWERS: 1. T; 2. F; 3. T; 4. F; 5. F

LISTENING IN YOUR LIFE

Are you a fan of the video game Angry Birds? If so, you are not alone. A recent version, Angry Birds Space, was downloaded 10 million times in three days. The game and its popularity have at least two lessons to teach

230

us about listening. First, Angry Birds proves that most of us are able to concentrate. In fact, it demonstrates that we will focus intently on something that appeals to us, even if it means skipping a meal just so we can get to the next level of success. Second, the game shows us how feedback can function as a motivator. When we play Angry Birds, the feedback we receive sustains our engagement, virtually compelling us to continue.4 The question is, how can we use what we learn from Angry Birds to improve our listening?

We focus intently when playing Angry Birds

Most of us spend more of our communication time listening rather than playing Angry Birds or doing anything else—even speaking. You are probably thinking, “That’s not possible! I spend most of my time speaking!” But that is not what communication research reveals. Studies have found that the average college student spends more than 50 percent of the available communicative time in an average day listening, and the average employee spends more than 60 percent of an average workday listening.5 Listening clearly consumes more time than any other communication-related behavior. If you add the time you spend listening to various media outlets, research shows that on average young people typically spend ten hours or more consuming media and multitasking with media daily.6 What is more, the use of digital media complicates things further by helping to distract us. In fact, many of us have grown so accustomed to receiving quick bursts of information, sometimes in the form of tweets, that we expect all messages to be delivered succinctly. Many find it increasingly taxing to listen to more detailed and complex information.7 That we spend a great deal of each day listening is undeniable—whether we do it well, however, is another issue.8

231

Research reveals that while the average person hears a great deal throughout the day, he or she processes just half of what is said, understands about a quarter of the message, and retains even less of the content. Too frequently, we take listening for granted, and that is not good news for us. It is also not good news for the people we are supposed to be listening to, and it does not bode well for our relationships. When it comes to making relationships work, listening is just as important as other communicative behaviors.

True or False 1. Most of our waking time is spent listening. True. Listening consumes more of our time than any other communication activity.

Consider this: How can you afford not to improve your listening ability when we know the following?

1. We are exposed to millions of words every year. 2. We spend a much larger percentage of our waking day listening than

we do speaking, writing, or reading. 3. On average, we listen at only 25 percent efficiency; that is, instead of

retaining most of what we hear, we lose approximately 75 percent of the conveyed content over a very short time.

4. Listening errors are common. While listening is our most pervasive activity, it is also our least developed communicative skill.

5. Listening is not a passive act. Whether we want to gain information, evaluate a message, or merely be entertained, listening requires our active participation.

6. It pays to listen. Listening mistakes carry both personal and monetary costs. In fact, if each U.S. citizen paid just ten dollars for every listening mistake made in a year, the national total would be more than one billion dollars.

232

7. If we do not give people with whom we interact honest feedback, we forfeit our right to complain about them.

8. Our very existence, as well as the effectiveness of all our person-to- person contacts, depends on our ability to listen and respond appropriately. We rely on our listening skills to develop relationships, make personal and professional decisions, formulate attitudes and opinions, mentally store data for later use, and provide feedback to others.

9. You will spend more time in this class listening than speaking.

This chapter will help you become a better listener.

While we need to develop our abilities to understand and critically evaluate what others tell us, it is equally important for us to develop our abilities to empathize with and provide feedback to those with whom we share relationships. Our relationships will benefit from our learning to recognize those factors that cause us to turn off and stop listening when that is the last thing we should be doing.

True or False 2. If we can hear, we can listen. False. Hearing and listening are not the same thing. Hearing is an unconscious process; listening is a conscious process.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HEARING AND LISTENING

Effective listeners do not listen only with their ears—they also rely on their minds. To listen well, you need to think effectively. Hearing is the first step in a two-part process.

233

Hearing is an involuntary, physiological process. Just as we do not need to think to breathe, neither do we need to think to hear. As long as our eardrums are functional, when sound waves hit them, the subsequent vibrations cause the tiny bones of the middle ear—known as the hammer, anvil, and stirrup—to vibrate. Once these vibrations reach our auditory nerves, they are transformed into electrical impulses and automatically processed by our brains, and we hear. What we do with these impulses once we receive them takes us into the complex arena of listening.

In contrast to hearing, listening is a voluntary, psychological process. It is “the process of receiving, attending to, and assigning meaning to aural and visual stimuli.”9 As we assign meaning to a spoken message, a number of components come into play, including understanding, remembering, interpreting, and responding. If we do not listen well, we likely will not understand what we hear, and we may pass misinformation on to others. Far too often, instead of listening actively to others, we only hear them. Our minds are asleep rather than alert, and we passively receive, rather than actively process, what they are saying. When we listen, however, we not only hear the message but also make sense of it—or at least we try to.

Hearing: An involuntary physiological response in which sound waves are transformed into electrical impulses and processed by the brain.

Listening: A voluntary psychological process consisting of the following stages: sensing, attending, understanding/ interpreting, evaluating, responding, and remembering.

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EFFECTIVE AND INEFFECTIVE LISTENERS

Think of the worst listener you know. What does this person do that suggests to you he or she does not really listen to you? Imagine the person’s demeanor when interacting with you.

ANALYZE THIS: Understanding “Understanding”

234

What is the listener’s intention? In this excerpt from The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen R. Covey describes a specific behavior that hurts a relationship. Identify the behavior and then cite your own examples to illustrate how either you or another person you know has been guilty of acting in the way Covey describes.

“Seek first to understand” involves a very deep shift in paradigm. We typically seek first to be understood. Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to replay. They’re either speaking or preparing to speak. They’re filtering everything through their own paradigms, reading their autobiography into other people’s lives.

“Oh, I know exactly how you feel!”

“I went through the very same thing. Let me tell you about my experience.”

They’re constantly projecting their own home movie onto other people’s behavior. They prescribe their own glasses for everyone with whom they interact.

If they have a problem with someone—a son, a daughter, a spouse, an employee—their attitude is, “That person just doesn’t understand.”

A father once told me, “I can’t understand my kid. He just won’t listen to me at all.”

“Let me restate what you just said,” I replied. “You don’t understand your son because he won’t listen to you?”

“That’s what I said,” he impatiently replied.

“I thought that to understand another person, you needed to listen to him,” I suggested.

“Oh!” he said. There was a long pause. “Oh!” he said again, as the

235

light began to dawn. “Oh yeah! But I do understand him. I know what he’s going through. I went through the same thing myself. I guess what I don’t understand is why he won’t listen to me.”

This man didn’t have the vaguest idea of what was really going on inside his boy’s head. He looked into his own head and thought he saw the world, including his boy.

SOURCE: Stephen R. Covey, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1989, p. 239–2.

What words would you use to describe this person as a listener? Typically, words such as distracted, inattentive, closed-minded, daydreamer, bored, impatient, nonresponsive, and rude come to mind. Now think of the best listener you know, and select adjectives to describe his or her behavior. Probably among the words you have chosen to describe the best listener are concerned, open-minded, intelligent, attentive, interested, and respectful. Compare and contrast the words you have selected to describe the best and worst listeners. Which words on the lists you have created would you use to describe your own behavior as a listener? Which words do you imagine others would choose to describe you when you interact with them?

Are you the best listener you could be? We lose when we listen ineffectively, and we stand to gain much when we listen effectively. But what exactly is it that we lose or gain? To find out, first ask and answer the following questions yourself, and then ask them of two other people.

1. What consequences have you suffered when you have displayed a lack of respect for someone you were conversing with?

2. What problems have you encountered after losing your temper with someone else?

3. What challenges have you faced when you have failed to understand what another person was telling you?

4. How has jumping to an incorrect conclusion caused problems for you?

5. What happened when you missed a key conversational segment because you were distracted?

236

6. How did the person you were conversing with respond upon realizing that you were not really listening?

Being distracted or daydreaming impedes listening.

Listening increases relationship satisfaction. When we fail to listen to each other, our relationships usually experience problems. In contrast, effective listening helps to enhance our relationships by doing the following:

• Decreasing stress. Stress levels are reduced as ideas and feelings are communicated clearly and understood as intended.

• Increasing knowledge. We learn more about each other when we listen effectively. Each of us learns more about what the other responds to and how the other reacts to our ideas.

• Building trust. We all need someone to listen to us. We appreciate those who listen much more than those who fail to give us their complete attention. In fact, careful listening can be a reciprocal act: we pay closer attention to those who do the same for us, and we tend to avoid those who do not.

• Improving analysis and decision making. Careful listening can provide you with information and insights that enable you to exercise better judgment. Rather than accepting what is presented at face value, you are more likely to spot faulty reasoning and identify invalid arguments or gross appeals to prejudice when you listen critically. In the process, you protect yourself against others who may act irresponsibly. Careless listeners are more likely to end up

237

accepting the unacceptable.

• Increasing confidence. When another person perceives you to be giving him or her your rapt attention and believes that you are open, alert, and actively involved, that person will be more comfortable interacting with you and more likely to share his or her feelings. By listening effectively, you also increase your own confidence and understanding. As you increase your comprehension of another’s ideas and feelings, you gain confidence in your ability to respond appropriately.

STAGES OF LISTENING

The HURIER model of listening, developed by listening expert Judi Brownell, dean of the School of Hotel Administration at Cornell University, represents a behavioral approach that suggests that listening is a system of interrelated components that includes both mental processes and observable behaviors. The model focuses on six aspects, or stages, of listening: hearing, understanding, remembering, interpreting, evaluating, and responding (see Figure 4.1).10

HURIER model: A model of listening that focuses on the following stages: hearing understanding, remembering, interpreting, evaluating, and responding.

TRY THIS: How’s Your LQ (Listening Quotient)? First, fill out the following inventory to gauge your listening effectiveness:

238

Every “yes” response indicates a behavior that can function as an impediment to listening and, as such, merits your attention.

Next, answer questions 1–2 below yourself, then ask two people with whom you interact regularly to fill in the answers to questions 5–2 for you.

How does your self-rating compare to the ratings others gave to you?

Figure 4.1 Listening Stages

239

STAGE 1: HEARING We exist in a world filled with the aural stimuli. Sounds surround us, competing to be noticed, but we choose to pay attention only to the ones that interest us. Eugene Raudsepp of Princeton Creative Research explained the hearing/sensing process by telling the story of a zoologist who is walking with a friend down a busy street filled with the sounds of honking car horns and screeching tires. Turning to his friend, the zoologist says, “Listen to that cricket!” The friend, with astonishment, replies, “You hear a cricket in the middle of all this noise?” The zoologist takes out a coin and flips it in the air. As the coin falls to the sidewalk, a dozen heads turn in response to its “clink.” The zoologist responds, “We hear what we listen for.”11

Attending involves our willingness to focus on and organize particular stimuli. We attend to a sound by concentrating on it, even if just for a moment. Unless the sound holds our attention, we will soon refocus our attention on something else. Consequently, it is not enough to capture another’s attention; attention needs to be maintained.12 This requires developing sensitivity to the interests of those with whom we make contact.

STAGE 2: UNDERSTANDING During the understanding stage we absorb the meaning of a person’s statement or sound. In a sense, we work to decode what is being said using our own reservoir of information, and we refrain from judging the message until we are certain we comprehend it. In an effort to ensure understanding, we might reply to the speaker with questions aimed at clarifying the message’s content. Rephrasing or paraphrasing what we have heard also helps us comprehend the message.

240

True or False 3. We hear what we listen for. True. We pay attention to what interests us.

STAGE 3: REMEMBERING During the remembering stage, our brain assigns meaning to the spoken words. Once that is accomplished, we may or may not commit the information to our memory for further use. Here again, we make choices, as we decide what has value and is worth remembering and what we can discard. Of course, if we have intense feelings for the person we are with, or if the message is reinforced, we increase our chances of remembering. Our memory allows us to retain and recall information when we need to. On the other hand, some forgetting is necessary for our mental health.

Two key kinds of memory concern us: short-term memory and long-term memory. We store most of what we hear, if only briefly, in the limited space of our brain’s short-term memory bank. Unless we continually use and apply what we store in short-term memory, we will forget it before we can transfer it into our long-term memory bank for use at a much later date. This helps explain why we remember only 50 percent of a message immediately after listening to it and approximately 25 percent after a brief period has elapsed. Our more permanent memory storage facility, long- term memory, plays an important role in listening by connecting new experiences to previous images and information. We remember personal and public events of significance. For example, you likely remember the birthdays of people close to you, as well as where you were when you learned of a loved one’s death, or when you survived a natural disaster.

241

Attending: Paying attention; the willingness to organize and focus on particular stimuli.

STAGE 4: INTERPRETING When we interpret a message, we attempt to make sense of it. In order to interpret effectively, we consider the message from the sender’s perspective. Doing this keeps us from imposing our meaning onto another person’s ideas. We make the effort to discover how the other person views the situation.

For example, suppose your friend says, “I’ve had enough!” By listening to his tone of voice and observing his facial expressions you can decide whether your friend is talking about the meal he is eating with you or he is upset by the conversation you are having with him. Each represents a very different interpretation of his words. The meaning you settle on will determine how you respond.

STAGE 5: EVALUATING When we evaluate a statement, we weigh the worth of and critically analyze what we have listened to, appraising what we were told. We decide if the message has relevance for us or is based on what we know or feel. As with all the stages of listening, we have choices to make. Separating facts from inferences, weighing evidence, and identifying prejudices and faulty arguments are part of the evaluation process. When we fail to evaluate a message effectively, we risk agreeing with ideas or supporting actions that violate our values or have been slanted to earn our support.

For example, when you ask your congressional representative if she supports increasing taxes on those who earn more than one million dollars annually, and she says, “Don’t worry about me. I’m okay on that!” she is counting on you to believe she agrees with whatever stance you support. Unless you follow up with additional questions, however, you do not have adequate information to determine where she actually stands on the issue.

STAGE 6: RESPONDING Responding effectively to the messages we receive through the day affects our overall communication experience. When we respond to someone, we react and provide feedback; we communicate our thoughts and feelings

242

about the received message. We let the person know whether we think the message was communicated successfully or flawed, whether it was “on target” or “missed its mark.” In effect, we become the sender’s radar. We will address responding in more depth later in this chapter, in our discussion of feedback.

STYLES AND TYPES OF LISTENING

When interacting with others, we are likely to exhibit one of four listening styles: people-oriented, action-oriented, content-oriented, or time- oriented.13 We are also likely to find ourselves engaged in one of four types of listening: appreciative, comprehensive, critical or deliberative, or empathetic. (See Tables 4.1 and 4.2.) While most of us may prefer to use one style and to listen to a particular kind of content, we probably all use each of the four styles and four types of listening.

STYLES OF LISTENING Adherents of each of the following listening styles display different attitudes and beliefs about listening. Which one of the following styles is your personal favorite?

People-Oriented Listening. Those who like to focus on the emotions and interests of others prefer the people-oriented style. When you take your time and work to understand what others think and feel, you improve your chances of getting to know them well. Thus, the people-oriented style fosters relating to others in more meaningful ways.

REFLECT ON THIS: When Is Lestening Not First and Foremost?

243

Researchers assert that listening may well be the most important skill in our communication arsenal because it is necessary for relationship building — in both the personal and professional arenas of life. However, while the research demonstrates listening’s value, there are also times when the act of listening itself may pose a danger to the listener and others. Can you think of when this could be the case? Have you ever used your cell phone while driving a vehicle?

According to the research, when the act of listening distracts from the primary responsibility of driving, the listener is endangering her- or himself, passengers, and other drivers or pedestrians. Texting and cell phone use—even when conducted with hands-free devices—cause drivers to lose focus and thus contribute to decreased driving accuracy. The risk faced by drivers who access their cells while driving is four times the risk undistracted drivers face—and similar to to the risk associated with driving while intoxicated. It appears that simply attempting to comprehend a spoken or texted message competes with the driver’s need to focus on driving. Thus, driving and listening both require your full attention and should not be placed in competition with each other.

SOURCES: F. E. Gray, “Specific Oral Communication Skills Desired in New Accountancy Graduates,” Business Communication Quarterly, 73:1, 2010, p. 40–2.

See Marissa A. Harrison, “College Students’ Prevalence and Perception of Text Messaging While Driving,” Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43, 2011, p. 1516–2; Amy N. Shys, “The Most Primary of Care—Talking about Driving and Distraction,” New England Journal of Medicine, 362, 2010, p. 2145–2; and M. S. Just, T. A. Keller, and J. A. Cynkar, “A Decrease in Brain Activation Associated with Driving When Listening to Someone Speak,” Brain Research, 1205, 2008, p. 70–2.

TABLE 4.1 Styles of Listening

Style Focus

People-oriented Emotions and Interests

Action-oriented Clarity, precision, and assumptions

Content-oriented Facts, details, and ambiguities

Time-oriented Efficiency and succinctness

244

Action-Oriented Listening. If you value clarity and preciseness above all else, you are apt to use the action-oriented style often. Action-oriented listeners do not like to feel frustrated by others’ indirect messages. They want the persons they speak with to be direct and straightforward.

Content-Oriented Listening. Those who enjoy being intellectually challenged and having to work ideas through practice the content-oriented style. Comfortable listening to messages that are ambiguous and spark debate, content-oriented listeners commonly relate what they are listening to their own views.

Time-Oriented Listening. Time-oriented listeners expect the speaker to get to the point. Impatient and efficient, they like others to impart messages that are quick and brief, allowing the listeners to work through them efficiently.

TYPES OF LISTENING As we have noted, it is doubtful that any of us practice one type of listening exclusively. Still, each of us is likely to prefer one type over others. Which type of listening do you enjoy most?

Empathetic listening builds strong rxelationships.

Appreciative Listening. Sometimes we listen for pleasure—we watch American Idol, go to a concert, view a film, or go to a comedy club, actively seeking out an appreciative listening activity. Such activities,

245

often experienced with another person, help us unwind or escape.

Appreciative listening: Listening engaged in for pleasure.

Comprehensive listening: Listening engaged in to gain knowledge.

Critical or deliberative listening: Listening that involves working to understand, analyze, and assess content.

Empathy: The ability to understand another’s thoughts and feelings and to communicate that understanding to the person; the ability to comprehend another’s point of view.

Empathetic listening: Listening that involves understanding and internalizing the emotional content of a message.

Comprehensive Listening. When you listen to gain knowledge you engage in comprehensive listening. When you ask for directions, listen to a friend’s description of her new job, listen to talk radio to get a better idea of current events, or pay close attention to lectures in class, you are listening to derive information. Because your primary purpose is to learn, you listen with an open mind and suspend judgment.

Critical/Deliberative Listening. Have you ever questioned the truth of a message, its usefulness, or the reliability of the person delivering it? Frequently, in addition to working to understand content, we must also analyze it, assess its worth, validity, and soundness, and, ultimately, decide whether to accept or reject it. We perform these functions when we engage in critical or deliberative listening.

Empathetic Listening. In Chapter 3, we introduced the topic of empathy. Because empathy is also a skill needed for effective listening, we explore it in more depth here.

When another person reaches out to us for support, he needs us to engage in empathetic listening. This type of listening is important to master if you seek to build strong interpersonal relationships. For example, when was the last time you called a friend because you needed a sounding board or someone to tell your troubles to? When was the last time you helped someone else work a problem through by offering her or him your ear?

TABLE 4.2 Types of Listening

246

Type Example Goal

Appreciative Listening to music Be entertained

Comprehensive Listening to a lecture Acquire information

Critical/deliberative Listening to a politicaldebate Make an evaluation

Empathetic Listening to a friendtalk about a breakup Therapeutic—to be a sounding board

Empathetic listening serves a therapeutic function: it facilitates problem solving, it lends a different, clearer perspective to any given situation, and it helps individuals regain emotional balance. When you listen empathetically, you understand the dilemma another is facing from his or her viewpoint, not yours. You do your best to interpret the situation as if you were the other person.

Those who score high in emotional intelligence are generally better at de- centering themselves while listening. That is, an empathetic person places the focus on another in order to understand that person as he or she desires to be understood. In this way, empathetic listening is a relationship enhancer.14

While for some of us empathizing comes naturally, others need to work at it. In general, women are more likely to describe themselves as being empathetic (that is, able to feel what another feels) than are men. Women are more likely than men to report feeling distressed when other persons share their troubles with them. This may explain why all of us, male and female, usually turn to a woman when we need an empathetic listener.15

Good listeners are other-oriented. Sometimes, all we need to do is show that we respect and have compassion for the person talking with us. When you listen empathetically, your goal is to understand the other person’s thoughts and feelings, so you need to put aside your own thoughts and feelings and listen from that person’s point of view. When empathizing you activate three skills: empathetic responsiveness, perspective taking, and sympathetic responsiveness.16

247

When we exhibit empathetic responsiveness, we experience an emotional response that corresponds to the emotions the other person is experiencing. For example, when Samira tells Tong that she has to leave school because her family needs her at home, if Tong understands and feels the same regret and sadness that Samira is feeling, she will have done so by using her powers of empathetic responsiveness.

When we employ perspective taking, we place ourselves in the shoes of the other person. If Tong imagines herself in Samira’s position and understands some of the same emotions, she will have fulfilled the expectations of perspective taking. For example, not only does Samira feel regret and sadness about leaving school, she feels guilty for not wanting to help her family at home. If Tong is able to point this out and perhaps offer a clearer perspective on it, she is practicing this particular type of empathetic skill.

Finally, if Tong feels concern and compassion for Samira because of the situation Samira faces, then Tong also will have succeeded in demonstrating sympathy, or sympathetic responsiveness. Sympathetic responsiveness is different from and falls short of empathy because, while the receiver feels for the other person, without perspective taking and empathetic responsiveness she does not feel with the other person. For example, when you sympathize with and console a friend whose dog has died, even though you have never been in her situation because you are afraid of dogs and you cannot imagine what she is feeling, you are being sympathetically responsive.

Empathetic responsiveness: A listener’s experiencing of an emotional response that corresponds with the emotions a speaker is experiencing.

Perspective taking: Adopting the viewpoint of another person.

Sympathetic responsiveness: Feeling for, rather than with, another.

What can you do to increase your empathetic abilities? If you are very individualistic, or “I’-oriented, empathizing may not typically be easy for you. You may be so used to being the center of attention that you may find it challenging to look at the world from anyone else’s point of view. Yet, if you want to improve your effectiveness at developing meaningful interpersonal relationships, empathizing is a skill you ought to master. Here are six steps you can take to improve your empathy quotient:

248

1. Make a concerted effort to become other-oriented, paying careful attention to what others are saying and feeling. If, for example, your partner comes home depressed after a hard day at work, try to imagine how you would feel if you were in his or her situation.

2. Take in the whole scene. Focus not just on words but also on the nonverbal cues that are part of the other person’s message. Tune in to how the person walks, sits, looks, and sounds.

3. Work to understand the other person’s emotions by questioning the other person and then paraphrasing how you think he or she feels. Your goal is to obtain more details, clarify the nature of the situation, or get at the root cause of what the other person is feeling. When paraphrasing, you might say something like “I guess you are feeling … ?” or “So now you are likely feeling … ?” By questioning and paraphrasing, you check your perception and ensure that you accurately comprehend how the person feels.

4. While processing the other person’s information, repeatedly ask yourself why you believe the other person is experiencing what he or she is, and try to identify what it is that makes you think and feel that this is so. Is it what the person says to you, his or her facial expressions, or something else? By focusing on the person’s emotions and the cues you are using to draw your conclusions, you also increase your attentiveness and become better at sensing the other person’s emotional state.

5. Again, use the skill of perception checking, discussed above and in the preceding chapter, to facilitate your understanding of what the other person is experiencing. Acknowledge what you think the person has said, and then inquire whether your interpretation is correct.

6. Once you fully understand the other person’s feelings, you may still need to provide her or him with emotional comfort and support. Help the other person feel better and/or show that you care about what happens to him or her. When you comfort and support someone, you provide affirmation, acknowledging the person’s right to feel as he or she does. You also offer reassurance, consolation, and assistance and, if appropriate, try to cheer the person up or divert his or her attention. And remember that you can comfort someone using both verbal and nonverbal cues.

249

True or False 4. If after a person tells you about a problem, you say, “It’s nothing; don’t even waste your time thinking about it,” you are helping to legitimate the other person’s feelings. False. Telling someone that his or her problem is “nothing” diminishes that person’s feelings and displays a lack of support.

If you fail at empathizing, usually it is for one of the following reasons:

1. You deny the other person the right to his or her feelings, suggesting that what he or she is feeling is either wrong or inappropriate. You might say something like “You shouldn’t be so upset” or “Don’t let that get you down.” By uttering such a statement, you unwittingly suggest that the person should feel differently—in effect, you “delegitimate” his or her emotions.

2. You minimize the importance of the situation to the other person by saying, “It’s no big deal,” or “Why are you making a mountain out of a molehill?” Such statements reveal that you really do not understand what the other person is going through.

3. You pass judgment on the other person by saying something such as “Well, you asked for it” or “It’s you own fault.” Such comments do little more than make the other person defensive.

4. You feel the urge to defend yourself and say something self-centered like “I didn’t do it” or “Don’t blame me.” Defending yourself does nothing to help or support the other person.

5. You place the focus on tomorrow rather than on today. Empathizing occurs in the present, not in the future. While the person who needs your empathy may not remember how bad he or she felt at this moment a decade or a day from now, that is not what he or she wants

250

or needs to hear from you right now.

The closer you feel to the other person, and the more familiar you are with his or her situation, the easier it should be for you to demonstrate empathetic responsiveness. You will likely have to work harder to exhibit genuine empathetic responsiveness toward someone you have known only briefly. By using phrases such as “I’m listening,” “I hear you,” and “I get it,” you can demonstrate your respect, understanding, and acceptance of another person, even someone you do not know very well.17

Each type of listening is of value in interpersonal communication. Listening for pleasure relaxes as well as entertains us and helps us develop new insights into our relationships. Listening to derive information sensitizes us to how we can deliver information and clarify understanding. By listening to evaluate information, we learn that just as we evaluate another’s behavior, so will that person evaluate ours. And listening to empathize helps us understand what we can do to understand and feel what another person is feeling and, when appropriate, help another person see things through our eyes and appreciate our perspective. When we listen empathetically, the focus is on the other person, not on ourselves.

LISTENING ETHICS

At one time or another, we have all committed an unethical listening act— preferring to pursue our private thoughts, reminisce, or worry about something personal rather than concentrate on what the other person was saying. Unethical listeners believe their own thoughts are more worthy of attention than yours. Thus, in the competition for thinking space, their thoughts win and yours lose. Not listening to another can have serious consequences. For example, imagine what could happen if a physician is more concerned with her own thoughts than with listening to a patient describe his symptoms. And what difficulties might follow if a judge fails to listen attentively to the arguments presented by prosecuting and defense attorneys? Regardless of the role or position of the listener, listening not only fulfills a personal obligation but also confirms a societal bond.

251

Have you ever gone on “a listening vacation” while another person tried to reach you?

If you are to become a more effective listener, you need to recognize the internal and external factors that lead to deficient listening (see Table 4.3) and then do your part to eliminate them. Ethical listeners do not engage in nonlistening—that is, they do not answer any of the following questions with a yes.

DO YOU TUNE OUT?

A listener who does not care about the person with whom he or she is conversing tunes out what the other is saying. When someone tries to start a conversation or share ideas with them or influence them, unethical listeners do not pay attention; they act as if their ears and minds are “out to lunch” or “on vacation.” They are preoccupied—too busy thinking about their own problems or something else. As a result, they fail to focus fully or actively on the messages that others send.

252

Nonlistening: A kind of deficient listening behavior in which the receiver tunes out.

ANALYZE THIS: Active and Inactive Listening

Active listening has a lot in common with perception checking, since it involves feeding back to the speaker your understanding of what the speaker has communicated to you, both in content and in feeling. Active listening holds the key to our engagement with one another in mutually understood messages, both on a cognitive and an emotional level. By providing feedback, we enable the other person to clarify his or her thoughts and emotions.

In listening actively, we pay attention to and respond using both verbal and nonverbal cues. We identify what the speaker has just said and what we think the speaker means. Doing this helps ensure understanding by giving the speaker the chance to clarify misunderstandings or misperceptions on our part. Active listening, however, goes even further than this. When listening actively, we also let the speaker know that we understand his or her feelings and ask questions that provide the speaker with opportunities to talk further.

Consider the following scenario depicting how three of Maya’s friends reacted in response to her stating:

I’m screwed! Dr. Rodriguez wants me to redo this entire paper. I spent so much time researching it, but it’s still not good enough for him. He’s giving me two days to improve it or I’ll get a C. How am I going to get this done? Does he have any idea how busy my life is?

Davilla’s

253

response:

Dave’s response:

Two days isn’t so bad. You can do it. All you need to do is focus.

Doreen’s response:

Ugh, you worked so hard on that paper! You’re totally stressed out, aren’t you?

Which of the three friends do you think demonstrated active listening?

Davilla focused on herself. Dave attempted to diminish the problem facing Maya. Only Doreen attempted to promote a meaningful exchange with Maya. Doreen also reflected Maya’s feelings, recognizing their legitimacy, while the other two listeners did not.

What exactly did Doreen accomplish with her response? First, she paraphrased Maya’s original message, then she showed interest in how Maya was feeling by expressing her understanding of what she must be experiencing. Doreen also accomplished something else: because she made the attempt to cross-check her interpretation, she afforded Maya the chance to let her know if she had gotten it right.

SOURCE: See B. R. Burleson, “Explaining Recipient Responses to Supportive Messages: Development and Tests of a Dual-Process Theory,” in S. W. Smith and S. R. Wilson, eds., New Directions in interpersonal Communication Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2010, p. 159–2; and D. Johnson, “Helpful Listening and Responding,” in K. M. Galvin and P. Cooper, eds., Making Connections: Readings in Relational Communication, Los Angeles: Roxbury, 1996, p. 91–2.

Active listening: A form of listening that involves the paraphrasing of a speaker’s thoughts and feelings.

DO YOU FAKE ATTENTION? Listeners who do not care about the persons they interact with often engage in pseudolistening—that is, they fake attention. They pretend to listen when nothing could be further from the truth. They look at you, smile or frown appropriately, nod their heads, and even utter sounds such as “hmmm,” or “uh-huh.” All their external cues tell you they are listening, but they are only pretending to listen. In fact, they let no meaning get through.

254

meaning get through.

TABLE 4.3 Behaviors of Poor Listeners

Behavior Consequences

Tuning out Listener’s loss of focus and preoccupations makeunderstanding less likely.

Faking attention Listener’s pseudolistening looks and behaviordeceive the speaker.

Losing contact opportunities

Listener’s misjudging has potential effects on both message relevance and relationship.

Losing control Listener’s emotions and lack of patience lead toambushes, message distortions, and defensiveness.

Laziness Listener’s lack of effort and refusal to work atlistening make comprehension unlikely.

Selfishness Listener’s focus is on the self rather than on theother person.

Being distracted by external factors

Listener’s oversensitivity to setting or context interferes with listening.

Wasting time Listener’s failure to use the thought-speech differential to advantage compromises listening effectiveness.

Aprehensiveness Listener’s fear of the new leads to defensiveness.

Burnout Listener’s inability to cope with informationoverload closes down the mind.

DO YOU IGNORE SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS? Before even giving another person a chance, a deficient listener decides that the person looks uninteresting or sounds dull, or that there is no future for a relationship with him or her. Ineffective listeners’ tendency to

255

True or False 5. A “red-flag word” is patriotic. False. Red-flag words are words that precipitate emotional reactions that interfere with listening.

DO YOU LOSE EMOTIONAL CONTROL? Sometimes we let disagreements with another person get in the way of our listening carefully to him or her. Some of us even react so emotionally that we will go out of our way to avoid interacting with someone with whom we disagree or someone who is talking about a subject we do not care about or think might be too hard to comprehend.18 Sometimes, instead of listening to what the other person says, we distort what we take in until it conforms to what we think he or she should have said. In other words, we manufacture information rather than processing it, shielding ourselves from ideas we would rather not expose ourselves to at all.

Some of the words others speak function as red-flag words—words that interfere with our ability to listen because they trigger in us an emotional deafness that causes our listening efficiency to drop to zero as we take an emotional side trip. Among the words and phrases that might contribute to emotional deafness in some of us are Nazi, you should, you’re so slow, entitlement, and what’s wrong with you? Are you aware of any specific words or phrases that cause you to erupt emotionally, thereby disrupting your ability to continue interacting meaningfully and calmly with another?

Red-flag word: A word that triggers emotional deafness in the receiver, dropping listening efficiency to zero.

DO YOU AVOID CHALLENGING CONTENT? Listening is voluntary, and, unfortunately, some of us refuse to volunteer

256

DO YOU AVOID CHALLENGING CONTENT? Listening is voluntary, and, unfortunately, some of us refuse to volunteer to listen to people whose ideas or manners of expression challenge us. Believing that we will not understand the other person, we do not even give ourselves a chance to exercise our minds.

When was the last time you dismissed another person as uninteresting or unimportant because you told yourself, “I won’t understand what she has to say anyway”? Do you turn off possible relationships because you assume that you would have to work too hard to make them succeed? To what extent are you willing to stretch your mind to accommodate the challenge of new ideas instead of merely focusing on those people or ideas that validate your preconceived notions?

ARE YOU EGOCENTRIC? When was the last time you tuned out and turned off someone you were conversing with because you felt his or her ideas were irrelevant to you? People who are egocentric do this regularly. Seeing themselves as the center of the universe, and seeking only self-satisfaction, they are so wrapped up in themselves that they fail either to realize or to value their interconnectedness with others.

257

Anxiety can inhibit your ability to listen.

Ironically, egocentric listeners still expect those they converse with to listen to them. While they deny the other person’s desire to be listened to, they attempt to monopolize attention by having the other person focus attention on them. Thus, they are self- rather than other-oriented.

DO YOU WASTE POTENTIAL LISTENING TIME? We think a lot more quickly than we speak. When we converse, we typically speak at a rate of 150 to 200 words per minute. However, we can comprehend upward of 400 to 600 words per minute.19 The difference between the two is known as the speech-thought differential. Ineffective listeners waste this extra time by daydreaming instead of focusing on, summarizing, and asking themselves questions about the substance and meaning of the other person’s remarks. They would rather drift off than use the energy it takes to attend closely to what the other person is telling them.

258

ARE YOU OVERLY APPREHENSIVE? Apprehensive listeners are fearful of processing or psychologically adjusting themselves to messages that others send to them.20 For example, have you ever been so fearful of new situations, people, or information that you became overly anxious? Anxiety can cause us to become overly defensive, which, in turn, inhibits effective listening.

ARE YOU SUFFERING SYMPTOMS OF LISTENING BURNOUT? Sometimes, people who once were effective listeners become ineffective because they are burned out. When exposed to too much information at one time, our minds, unable to cope with information overload, simply close. For example, if you were a psychiatrist or psychologist and had to listen daily to clients’ disclosures, you might experience listening burnout and seek to spend your free time not listening so attentively.

Speech-thought differential: The difference between the rate of speech and the rate at which speech can be comprehended.

Certainly, we cannot listen at full capacity all the time. However, we need to become aware of how often and why we fail to listen and determine what we can do to become better at listening. Because not listening ethically is consequential, being an effective listener has implications for how well we perform our jobs and whether we live up to our relational responsibilities.

HURDLING LISTENING ROADBLOCKS

Listening consumes energy. When you listen actively, your body temperature rises, your palms become moist, and your adrenaline flow increases. Your body actually prepares itself to listen. You are the catalyst in this operation—you set in motion the listening process. Taking to heart the following principles will make your listening efforts more productive:

1. Listening requires your full attention. You can’t half listen—the half you miss could be critical.

2. Evaluation follows, it does not precede, reception. Withhold your evaluation until you are certain you have understood the other person’s message. Anger and hostility can impede understanding, as can rapture and hero worship. A heightened emotional state impedes

259

your ability to comprehend the other person. 3. The other person’s appearance or delivery is not an excuse for not

listening. Overlook a speaker’s monotone or lack of eye contact. Do not be distracted by a rough or unpolished demeanor. Concentrate on the message. A smooth, polished speaking manner can be equally harmful if you let it blind you to an absence of substance.

4. Likewise, judging another person based on your own existing negative or positive prejudice impedes listening. You either become busy arguing against the other person or are too quickly impressed to accurately process the message being sent.

5. How you listen affects how others feel about you. The better you are at reflecting the feelings of those with whom you interact, and the more adept you are at exhibiting empathetic and supportive behaviors, the more others will want to interact with you.

6. If you seek opportunities to practice skillful listening, you will become a better listener. Listeners are like athletes—daily practice improves their performance.

RESPONDING WITH FEEDBACK

Responding with feedback is an integral part of listening. Thus, developing your abilities to send and receive feedback improves your listening as well.

Think of listening as a collaborative process. Just as none of us functions solely as speaker or receiver, both parties to a conversation have the power to complicate or facilitate listening. Listening is a dialogic, or give-and- take, process in which speakers do not deliver monologues but instead are intimately involved in helping listeners participate in and coordinate what is a joint activity.21 Stand in the other person’s shoes. Tap into his or her interests, needs, and concerns. Contemplate the perceptions he or she has of you. Consider how culture might be influencing you when you are speaking and listening.

DEFINING FEEDBACK When we listen actively or responsively, we provide the other person with feedback. Recall from Chapter 1 that the term feedback implies that we are returning or “feeding back” to another person our reactions to their verbal and nonverbal messages. Whenever you consciously or unconsciously

260

emit a verbal or nonverbal message that another perceives to be a response to something he or she said or did, your message serves as feedback.

During interpersonal communication, you continually provide another person with feedback—and you are not always totally honest when you provide it, either. At times, when you are unhappy in your relationship or bored with a conversation, you may nevertheless put on your “I care for you” face or an “I’m interested” expression and nod adoringly or approvingly. Unfortunately, we can mislead others by providing dishonest feedback.

The feedback you offer another person affects how he or she interprets your relationship. Tiffany Cooper Gueye, CEO of Building Educated Leaders for Life, has noted that the most important thing she can provide to the people she works with is “direct, honest, clear feedback.”22 Many believe the need for such feedback holds in all relationships. Do you?

FEEDBACK OPTIONS Like communication, feedback is a continuous process. We constantly send feedback, whether or not we intend to. Another person can interpret everything we do or do not do, a raised eyebrow, folded arms, every word we speak or fail to speak, as feedback. Sometimes our feedback is purposeful, because we hope to evoke a specific response. For instance, your partner tells a joke and you laugh heartily because you want him or her to know you enjoyed it and would like him or her to feel comfortable telling you more. On the other hand, sometimes the feedback you send is unintentional and elicits unexpected reactions. Without our consciously realizing it, our words and behavior may provoke responses in another person that we never intended. When facing such an occurrence, we may say something like “That’s not what I meant!” or “Don’t take it that way!” Other times, a person simply refuses to acknowledge the feedback we sent, choosing instead to ignore it. Have you ever tried to convey your romantic interest to another person without receiving a response? Sometimes another person is not ready, willing, or able to process our honest reaction.

261

When given effectively, feedback has positive consequences.

The kind of feedback we offer and the content of the feedback we give another person are dependent on the kind of relationship we share. Our friend, for example, probably expects us to provide feedback on his or her appearance; our boss probably does not. Our partner is likely to give us feedback regarding our relationship strengths; our teachers probably will not. Well-given feedback has positive consequences for our relationships; poorly given feedback does not. Whether your feedback is likely to elicit positive or negative reactions from another person depends on how you answer these three questions:

1. Do you offer feedback at the right time? 2. Are you clear and specific about the feedback you give? 3. Is your feedback appropriate, tactful, and conducive to sustaining the

relationship?

Feedback May Be Immediate or Delayed. Much of the feedback we send during interpersonal communication is immediate; our reactions occur virtually simultaneously with our reception of a message. Immediate feedback is generally the most effective because our reaction can lose its impact on the other person if we wait too long. Sometimes, however, we may consciously withhold responding. For example, it is wiser to cool down before offering a response to a message that angers you. Feedback sent in anger can damage a relationship.

262

Interestingly, technology is beginning to influence how quickly feedback occurs in an array of settings, including the workplace. Whereas annual or biannual employee performance reviews have traditionally been the norm, now, because the new generation of workers is used to instant feedback or updates and craves regular feedback, companies such as Facebook have transitioned into offering quarterly, weekly, or even daily feedback sessions. At Facebook, for example, employees are encouraged to ask for and provide feedback regularly, after meetings, presentations, and projects. Asking, “How did it go?” and “What could I do better?” requires only a brief conversation.23

Feedback May Be Person- or Message-Focused. We can center feedback on either the person or the message. Feedback such as “You’re just about the most compassionate person I know” focuses on the person, while a statement such as “While I understand your position, I believe the reasons you offer are flawed” focuses on the message.

Feedback May Be Low- or High-Monitored. Feedback that is sincere and spontaneous is low-monitored feedback. It occurs constantly through the interpersonal communication process. As we exchange messages, we reveal our responses without consciously monitoring or censoring them. Much of the low-monitored feedback we offer is sent unintentionally and without careful planning or strategizing. In contrast, feedback that we offer to serve a specific purpose is high-monitored feedback. We are more guarded and think about whether our feedback will serve a desired purpose before sending it. For example, if your instructor were to ask you what you think of the course, you would probably monitor your feedback before responding.

Feedback May Be Evaluative or Nonevaluative. When we provide evaluative feedback, we announce our opinions or feelings about the matter we are discussing. For example, if a friend asks whether you like his haircut, he is asking for an evaluative response. He might interpret the slight pause before you say, “It looks great,” as meaning you don’t really like it. When we offer evaluative feedback, we provide positive or negative assessments to another; we let him or her know what we think of his or her ideas, abilities, looks, and so on. By its very nature, evaluative feedback is judgmental; it either confirms or refutes the communication of another.

263

Positive evaluative feedback keeps people and their communicative behaviors moving in the direction in which they are already heading. For example, if you are flirting with someone who is receptive to your advances, you will tend to continue flirting. Positive evaluative feedback serves a reinforcing function; it causes us to continue acting as we are by enhancing our desire to do so.

Negative evaluative feedback serves a corrective function—it helps reduce undesirable behavior. When we perceive feedback as negative, we are apt to change or modify our behavior accordingly. For example, if you tell an off-color joke and then receive feedback indicating that another person found it offensive, you probably will not tell another. Negative evaluative feedback alerts us to discontinue behavior in progress.

Evaluative feedback: Feedback that reveals one’s feelings or reactions to what one heard, providing a positive or a negative assessment.

Unlike evaluative feedback, which tends to be judgmental, nonevaluative feedback does not direct the action of another. Instead, we use it when we want to find out more about another person’s feelings or when we try to help another person work through his or her feelings. When providing nonevaluative feedback, we refrain from revealing our own personal opinions or judgments. We simply question, describe what we observe, or demonstrate our interest in listening to the person.

Because nonevaluative feedback is nondirective in style, a receiver may perceive it as positive in tone. This is also because we likely reinforce another’s behavior when we probe or offer support as he or she works through a problem. In reality, however, nonevaluative feedback goes beyond positive feedback, because it does more than merely reinforce behavior; it also enables others, without our direction, to explore their own thoughts and feelings and arrive at their own solutions. Nonevaluative feedback tends to fall into one of the following categories: probing, understanding, supporting, and “I” messages.

Probing. Probing is a nonevaluative technique in which we solicit additional information from another person in an effort to draw him or her out as well as to demonstrate our willingness to listen. For example, suppose a friend who is concerned about a job-related conflict tells you, “I’m really over the edge. My boss keeps pushing and pushing me. I’m going to snap.” If you are probing, you might inquire, “What’s she doing

264

that is so annoying?” or “What is it about your boss’s behavior that particularly concerns you?” or “Why do you think this is happening?” By responding in this way, you give the other person the opportunity to think through the problem while also offering him or her the chance for emotional release. On the other hand, responses such as “Oh, they’re all like that,” or “Who cares what the boss does?” or “You’re stupid for getting upset” could cause your friend to become defensive, preventing him or her from thinking through and discussing the troublesome situation with you.

Understanding. Understanding is an alternative kind of nonevaluative reaction. When we offer understanding, we try to comprehend what the other person is telling us, and we check our interpretations by paraphrasing (restating in our own words) what we have heard. By paraphrasing we show that we care enough about the other person and the problem he or she is facing to be certain we understand the message’s meaning. The following examples illustrate the use of paraphrases:

Person 1: I don’t think I’m good enough to get the job.

Person 2: You mean you think you lack the skills to get promoted?

Person 1: I am hurt that John trusts Sheila more than he trusts me.

Person 2: You mean you’re jealous of the attention John is paying Sheila?

Nonevaluative feedback: Feedback that is nonjudgmental.

Probing: A nonevaluative technique in which one solicits additional information from another.

Supportive feedback: Nonevaluative feedback that indicates that another’s problem is viewed as important.

If we use understanding early in a relationship, we communicate our willingness to listen and the person’s important to us. Understanding responses encourage a relationship’s development in part by demonstrating our sensitivity to and concern for the other person, and also by allowing the other person more time to describe and detail his or her feelings and

265

perceptions to us.

Supporting. When we respond by supporting, we indicate that we share the other person’s perception of a problem as important. For example, suppose your friend comes to you with a problem she believes is extremely serious. Perhaps your friend’s concern about the situation has caused her to become agitated, and she says that you couldn’t possibly understand her predicament. In offering supportive feedback you would do your best to calm her down by assuring her that that you understand the problem, that her world is not ending, and that you are there to help her work through it.

By offering supportive feedback, we accomplish a number of things: First, we do what we can to reduce the intensity of the other person’s feelings. Second, we let him or her know we consider the problem real. Instead of offering comments such as “Why are you worrying about that?” or “It’s ridiculous to care about that,” we say things like “I can tell you’re upset. Let’s sit down and discuss it. I’m sure you can find a way to work it out.” A friend who is distraught because he or she has just been fired or has just broken up with a lover does not need to be told, “Next time you’ll handle things differently,” “There’s no reason to be so upset,” or “I warned you about this.” It is much more productive to say instead, “I can tell you’re upset. I don’t blame you for feeling the way you do.” When we provide supportive feedback, we acknowledge the importance of the other person’s predicament, but we do not attempt to solve it; we simply listen, show the person we care, and, in so doing, help him or her to discover a solution.

266

When you offer supportive feedback, you acknowledge another person’s problem as important.

“I”Messages. By delivering nonevaluative feedback in the form of “I” messages, we refrain from passing judgment on the other’s actions; however, we do reveal our feelings about the situation.

Every time we interact with someone, we have a choice of providing them with evaluative or nonevaluative feedback. Neither form of feedback is always right or wrong. Sometimes, however, our choice can have an adverse effect on our relationship. Do any of these remarks sound familiar? “You’re a pain in the neck!” “You’re wasting my time!” What do these statements have in common? They contain the word you. When we utter such statements, we place blame for something on someone else. When we experience relationship problems, we sometimes resort to name- calling and place blame on others as a means of coping with the situation. Such feedback, however, builds barriers between us, which then become increasingly difficult to remove.

267

To avoid building these barriers, we can replace “you” messages with “I” messages. Instead of saying, “You’re really getting on my nerves”—which could be interpreted by the recipient as “I’m not liked”—explain how you feel. For instance, if you clarify the situation by saying something like “I’ve just walked in the door and you’re asking about our plans for tonight, which stresses me out. I need some time to unwind before talking about tonight,” your friend’s internal reaction is more apt to be along the lines of “Okay, she’s had a really tough day,” which is much less likely to evoke a defensive or self-serving reaction to you.

Each of the feedback types we have discussed has its place in our person- to-person contacts. Whether you opt to respond with evaluative or nonevaluative feedback depends on the other person, the situation, and your relationship.

CULTURE’S INFLUENCE ON LISTENING

Listening plays a vital role in the development of our social relationships. Just as culture plays a part in our perception of the self and others, so it plays a part in listening.

“I” messages: Nonevaluative forms of feedback that reveal a speaker’s feelings about the situation faced by another person.

Dialogic listening: Listening that involves give-and-take between persons interacting as they cocreate a relationship.

TRY THIS: It’s in the “I”s When phrased appropriately, “I” messages contain three parts: (1) a description of the other person’s behavior, (2) a description of how you feel about the behavior, and (3) an explanation of how the other person’s behavior affects you-its consequences. “You” messages begin with the word you and often express blame.

Respond to the following situation by first using a “you” message and then by using a three-part “I” message.

You and a colleague have been assigned the joint task of completing a complex project. You find your partner difficult to work with because he or she will not spend the time you think necessary to complete the

268

task.

Describe how you think the “you” message and the “I” message might each influence your relationship.

Dialogic listening, the process that occurs between people as they respond to one another, is an important focus during interpersonal communication.24 However, how we engage in dialogic listening differs from culture to culture. For example, in the United States we practice a people-oriented listening style that focuses on the feelings and concerns of the individuals interacting and the social aspects of their interaction. In contrast, those from Eastern cultures tend to practice speculative, metaphoric thinking.25 Sometimes life’s pressures interfere, pushing us away from adopting an open-ended, tentative, and playful attitude toward conversation; instead, we find ourselves pulled in the opposite direction, seeking more certainty, closure, and control. Interestingly, members of Western cultures tend to be less open and tentative in their listening behaviors than do members of Eastern cultures. Reflecting this, the Chinese emphasize the receiving process over the sending process, a demonstration of their concern for interpretation and anticipation.26

Cultural attitudes about when it is appropriate to talk and when one should remain silent also play roles. People from Eastern cultures view silence as signaling respectability and trust; they believe that words can corrupt an experience and that it is through heart-to-heart communication that people are able to grasp meaning intuitively.27 They believe people should listen more than talk.28 Thus, when interacting with persons from Eastern cultures such as China and Japan, persons from Western cultures such as the United States and England need to “listen between the lines”; that is, they would do well to listen to persons from Eastern cultures with more than their ears. When communicating with those from Eastern cultures, Westerners need to understand that what is important may be left unsaid. In other words, the intentions of the speaker may not be spoken directly, but implied. Additionally, because persons from China and Japan have been raised to be comfortable with silence, they simply do not talk as much as Americans do.29

Whereas some cultures value succinctness and directness, others value

269

elaboration and exaggeration. For example, members of Arabic cultures commonly use verbal exaggerations and forceful assertions in conversation. Rather than verbally restraining themselves, they release their emotions through language. The ancient Arab proverb “A man’s tongue is his sword” suggests that Arabic persons use language as a means of offense, to chastise or punish others, and to boast about their abilities. They may make assertions regarding others’ faults and failures, contributing to impressions among persons from non-Arabic cultures that they could be aggressive or threatening.30 A contrasting Arab proverb, “When you have spoken the word, it reigns over you. When it is unspoken you reign over it,” suggests an alternative explanation for how persons of Arabic cultures approach listening. It confirms their hesitation to be negative and their desire to maintain peace. Those who are unaware of this may easily misinterpret the intentions of individuals from Arabic cultures.

As we speak with and listen to members of different cultures, we need to remind ourselves that the meanings we give to words vary based on our experiences and backgrounds. Because culture influences how we use language, it also influences how we listen to and interpret language.

Silence: The absence of vocal communication.

TRY THIS: Culture, Communication Style, and Feedback Members of different cultures view feedback differently. In the United States and Europe, for example, individuals prefer direct communication, expecting feedback to be honest and reflective of the feelings of the person giving it. In contrast, members of Asian cultures, such as the Japanese, prefer communicating in a less specific and more indirect way, perhaps because of the value they place on politeness and the maintenance of a positive image. Consequently, members of Asian cultures may expect feedback also to be more indirect, confirming their belief that bluntness could injure the self-esteem of the person to whom feedback is directed. This may happen not just out of concern for others’ reactions, however, but because of the understanding that their fate and fortune are bound up with the fate and fortune of others. Of course, at times Americans are also indirect, particularly when discussing sensitive topics or when nervous about another’s response. Similarly, in close

270

relationships, interacting with people they know well and trust, members of Asian cultures may choose to be direct.

Asian cultures also instill in members a respect for silence. Silence, rather than talk, communicates. As a result, when interacting with members of Asian cultures, rather than break a silence with talk, persons from other cultures can benefit from learning to use the quiet in a way conducive to feedback once the silence ends.

1. Would you adapt how you offer feedback when interacting with someone from a culture different from yours? Why or why not?

2. In what ways, if any, might using your typical way of offering feedback pose problems for you when you are responding to someone of a different culture? Explain.

3. Pair up with a classmate and discuss a controversial topic of your choice, such as universal health care, capital punishment, or immigration policy. Before you respond to what the other person says, count to four. How does this delay in responding affect your comfort level and the tone of your discussion? Be specific.

SOURCES: See John C. Condon, With Respect to the Japanese, Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press, 1984, p. 43–2. See William B. Gudykunst, Bridging Differences: Effective intergroup Communication, 3rd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998, p. 173–2.

GENDER’S INFLUENCE ON LISTENING

To what extent, if any, do the listening behaviors of the men and women you know differ? Sociolinguist Deborah Tannen reports that women and men exhibit different listening styles and that they listen for different reasons. To what extent, if any, do your experiences confirm this? According to Tannen, women listen to confirm both the relationship and the person with whom they share a relationship.31 When a woman processes information, her real goal is to zoom in on an emotional level. This is another reason women excel at empathizing and at identifying another person’s communication mood; they are ready, willing, and able to allow others to open themselves up and reveal what is important to them.

271

In contrast, research reveals that men are more at home with comprehensive listening, hearing a message’s facts or informational dimension, and less comfortable handling its emotional content.32 Men desire to retain power and control; they want to dominate.33 As a result, they are more likely to listen for solutions so they can give advice rather than empathize. They also are apt to turn off their listening when they come across a problem they cannot solve right away. Unlike women, men generally do not listen to relay support; they want to solve the problem.34

Men and women listen for different reasons. Women hear a message’s emotional content; men hear the facts.

Empathetic listening, as we learned earlier, is essential for the development and maintenance of a meaningful relationship, so men may need to work to develop and demonstrate empathetic listening skills. They can help others perceive them to have such skills by using more vocal cues when listening, interjecting responsive sounds such as “uh-huh” and “hmmm” into their reactions. Such cues help another person feel listened to.35 Although early research found that men did not listen to provide emotional support, research completed within the past decade affirms that they do place a value on this kind of listening.36

Thus, a number of asymmetries exist in how women and men listen. In interactions between men and women, men tend to spend more time in the speaking role and women in the listening role. If women want to disengage themselves from the role of listener or responder, they probably need to take action, rather than waiting for men to stop speaking. When women exercise their right to enter the conversation, they also relieve men from feeling they have to give a solo conversational performance. Both men and women can expand their behavioral repertoires when it comes to listening.

272

Not only do men and women listen differently, but also they are listened to differently. For example, when men and women speakers use an equal number of tag questions or qualifiers, listeners still perceive the women to use these speech forms more often.37 Listeners perceive the speech of men as stronger, more active, and more aggressive than women’s speech, which they perceive as more polite, pleasing, and sweet.38 Even when women and men speak similarly, women’s speech is evaluated more negatively— being perceived as aggressive rather than strong, for example. Perhaps if listening were perceived not as a source of power differences between men and women but as a means of relationship building, our ability to process the speech of men and women equitably would improve.

MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGICAL INFLUENCES ON LISTENING

Media and technological innovations are part of our communication landscape. Acknowledging our short attention spans and urge to multitask, they are playing roles in affecting how we listen.

MEDIA INFLUENCES Critics have long contended that watching too much television shortens the attention spans of viewers. They argue that because we are offered information and entertainment in shorter and shorter segments, partly because programmers fear that if segments were made longer we would lose focus and tune out; our ability to give sustained attention to anything is called into question. Fast-paced editing and rapidly changing images delivering quick bursts of content are the rule.

Consider the advertisements for various brand-name prescription drugs on television, such as a recent one for the antidepressant Cymbalta. The ad features a dad, thin, young, and handsome, twirling his young daughter around their living room, while a newborn baby sleeps nearby. After witnessing the sense of well-being that permeates this scene, viewers suffering from depression are encouraged to ask their doctors to prescribe Cymbalta for them—even though they are also presented with a warning regarding the drug’s potentially harmful side effects, as mandated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The ad was successful; an increase in first-quarter sales of 88 percent was attributed to it.39 The advertiser, it

273

seems, understood the science of attention—that the typical viewer pays attention for only the first 6.5 seconds of a TV ad.40 The warning about side effects comes later in the ad. Using emotional appeals, the ad quickly captures viewer attention up front— we learn depression hurts, but Cymbalta can help. The detailing of the side effects comes at the point in the ad where we are least likely to pay attention, because we have been led already to imagine the ending. We hear the tone of the voice-over but pay little attention to the words. The warning about potential liver damage is delivered in softened consonants and end sounds, almost a murmur, as the ad’s visual imagery changes from tragic to happy—and we know a happy ending is upon us, whereas when the product is introduced and the punch line is delivered at the ad’s end, the voice-over diction is slower and the words more carefully enunciated. The makers of this commercial clearly understood how viewers listen and respond to such advertising.

WATCH THIS 4.1 For a video on multitasking and effective listening visit the student study site.

The media have other problematic influences on listening aside from diverting attention. Too frequently on opinion shows, whether on radio or TV, speakers talk over each other, competing for airtime and acting like spoiled children who will not wait their turns to speak. Meaningful discussion has become a rarity on the airwaves and on cable television.

TECHNOLOGY’S INFLUENCES Given the ubiquity of cell phones, we regularly exercise our ears and mouths—if only because we always can reach someone to listen to us. Still, the question is whether we spend more time listening to be entertained than we do talking to or listening to each other. How frequently, for example, do you respond passively to another person because you are preoccupied with the sounds or messages emanating from one or another communication medium? Some believe that our connections to digital media through smart phones and tablet and laptop computers cause us to focus on the visual rather than the aural—to emphasize the eye over the ear. Do you agree?

274

We often multitask when listening. Can your friends tell when your attention is divided?

With the explosion of texting and around-the-clock Web access, we “listen” more visually, rather than aurally. Texting and e-mailing provide messages devoid of a person’s voice or body language. And when we use our cell phones, caller ID lets us decide whose calls we will or will not pick up, while call-waiting lets us keep a person who wants to speak to us waiting for the opportunity to do so. On the other hand, Skype and webcams make it possible for us to see, speak, and listen to people across vast geographic divides for far less than the cost of a traditional landline- based long-distance phone call.

Additionally, our affinity for technology makes it likely that we will multitask when listening. For example, how often do you find yourself texting, tweeting, or checking e-mail while talking with another person? Unfortunately, because of multitasking, we frequently find ourselves not focusing exclusively on any sole communication channel. Consequently, we often fail to give a person we are with our full attention. In your opinion, should we develop rules specifying when multitasking is and is not socially acceptable? If so, what kinds of rules do you favor? If not, why do you believe such rules unnecessary?

TRY THIS: The Ethics of Illusionary Listening

275

Is it possible for people to face an operating television without really watching it? Likewise, can a person ignore a radio that is turned on? Finally, is it possible for people to speak to each other without listening?

1. How often, would you guess, do individuals with whom you regularly converse “turn off” their listening skills even while they are still in front of you?

2. Do you prefer having an “illusionary listener” to having no listener, much as television and radio stations prefer to have “illusionary viewers or receivers” (persons whose TVs or radios are on but who do not watch or listen) as long as they are counted in their program ratings?

3. Do you consider your Facebook friends to be real or illusionary listeners? Explain.

GAINING COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE: BECOMING A BETTER LISTENER

In this chapter we have explored the role of listening in relationships. You should now recognize that you can never be too good a listener. No matter how effective you believe your listening skills currently are, doing the following can help you become a better listener.

CATCH YOURSELF EXHIBITING A BAD HABIT Recognition of a fault precedes correction of it. If you monitor your listening behavior, you can catch yourself before you display an undesirable trait. That is the first step toward positive change.

SUBSTITUTE A GOOD HABIT FOR A BAD HABIT Think about the new listening habits you would like to have. For example, if you are a daydreamer and mentally wander off when someone is speaking to you, encourage yourself to display greater attentiveness and concentration. Visualize yourself listening effectively when conversing. Imagine the positive impact your new behavior will have on your relationships.

276

LISTEN WITH YOUR WHOLE BODY Take steps to ensure that your physical mannerisms do not distract or confuse the person you are interacting with. Instead of leaning back with your arms crossed, fidgeting, playing with your hair or jewelry, gazing repeatedly at your watch, or otherwise signaling that you are uninterested in what the other person is saying, make a commitment to convey a more positive listening demeanor. Assume an attentive posture, make good eye contact, and display appropriate facial expressions. In other words, get physically ready to listen. If you look more like an effective listener, you will be apt to behave like one.

CONSISTENTLY USE YOUR EARS, NOT JUST YOUR MOUTH When you converse with another, shift naturally and frequently from a speaking to a listening mode. Rather than monopolizing the speaking role or spending your time planning what you will say next, make a sincere effort when not speaking to focus on the other person’s message when he or she is talking. Rather than completing another’s statements because you “know for sure” what he or she is going to say, let the person complete his or her own thoughts. Conversing with another compels us to develop not just a speaking presence but also a listening attitude.

SEE THE OTHER SIDE One of the greatest detriments to listening is an unwillingness to look at a situation from another’s point of view. If you begin a conversation by telling yourself you are willing to see and feel from the other person’s perspective, you increase your chances for more meaningful interaction. You may not end up agreeing with what you have heard, but you will be more likely to understand where the thoughts and feelings are coming from.

DON’T LISTEN ASSUMPTIVELY Every message a person delivers to another person exists in at least four different forms:

1. The message as it exists in the mind of the person speaking to you (his or her thoughts)

2. The message as it is spoken (encoded by the person) 3. The message as the listener interprets it (decoded by you)

277

4. The message as the listener ultimately remembers it (influenced by personal selectivity or rejection biases)

When passed from person to person, messages become distorted. This happens for a number of reasons. First, it happens because we usually try to simplify the message we hear. Second, because of our apprehensiveness, we may not want to admit that we did not understand what someone told us; instead, we may try to make sense of what we heard by making certain assumptions. This usually results in our adding to, subtracting from, or otherwise altering the message.

PARTICIPATE ACTIVELY Listening is an active and responsive process, not a passive behavior. Ask questions. Paraphrase what the other person has said, and ask for confirmation of your understanding. In this way you can determine whether you are processing the other person’s words and feelings correctly.

Keep in mind that developing effective listening skills is necessary for developing yourself as an effective interpersonal communicator.

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Nonlistening Flora

“I didn’t mean to do it,” Flora told Fred, her boss at the factory outlet. “I just misheard you.” Tuesday had begun as a fairly typical day in Flora’s busy life. She had attended her morning classes, eaten a late lunch with several friends, and then left campus for a nearby factory outlet store where she was employed as an assistant manager on the evening shift to help pay her way through college.

278

As she arrived, Flora’s boss said, “Be sure and mark the silk designer blouses down to $19.99.” It seemed a little low, but who was she to question Fred’s instructions? She told Joe, one of the stock workers, to adjust the price immediately. About an hour later, Adel, a salesclerk, told Flora that the blouses were moving off the shelf. Flora instructed Joe to bring out another case. Indeed, before her shift’s end, eager shoppers had purchased the entire contents of five more cases of the silk designer blouses. As Flora prepared to close the store, she gazed at the now-depleted blouse display and saw the problem: the blouses had been marked down to $9.99 erroneously. Just then, Fred called Flora to see how things were going. She told him what had happened, and explained, “I told Joe to mark the blouses down to $19.99 like you said, but he mistakenly marked them down to $9.99. He just didn’t listen. Should I dock his pay or fire him?” “Fire him?” came the reply. “I told you to mark the blouses up to $99.99. We’ve now lost $90 for every blouse we sold tonight! You and Joe are two of the worst listeners ever!” Flora and her boss reached an agreement. The listening mistake would not be paid for out of Flora’s salary all at once; it would be deducted from her paychecks over several weeks. Flora felt terrible. Lost in thought, she wondered, “How could I have made such a costly mistake?”

Consider these questions:

1. Why do you imagine Flora made the initial listening error?

2. What steps can Flora take to ensure that she listens to others correctly and others listen to her correctly?

3. If you were in Flora’s shoes, do you think you would have made the mistake she did, or are you a more proficient listener than she?

REVIEW THIS

279

CHAPTER SUMMARY

1 Define and distinguish between hearing and listening. Hearing is an involuntary physiological process; listening is a voluntary psychological process we use to understand and retain aural messages.

2 Identify and explain the six stages of listening identified in the HURIER model. The six stages in the HURIER model are hearing (the physical act of perceiving sound), understanding, (comprehending meaning), remembering (the storing and retrieving of information as needed), interpreting (the assigning of meaning based on the other’s perspective), evaluating (assessing the truth and accuracy of a message), and responding (demonstrating to another that you are listening by providing feedback).

3 Define and distinguish among the four styles and four types of listening. The four styles of listening are people-oriented (listening to discover commonalities), action-oriented (listening to process errorless, concise messages), content-oriented (listening to be intellectually stimulated), and time-oriented (listening to receive quick and to-the- point communications). The four types of listening are appreciative (listening for enjoyment), comprehensive (listening to gain knowledge), critical (listening to analyze, assess, and decide to accept or reject a message), and empathetic (listening to think and feel as another does by functioning as a sounding board or in a therapeutic role).

4 Compare and contrast the behaviors of effective and ineffective listeners. Ineffective listeners tune out, fake attention, lose opportunities for meaningful contact, become overly emotional, look for the easy way out, act in an egocentric manner, are overly sensitive to context, waste time, are overly apprehensive, and/or exhibit symptoms of listening burnout. Effective listeners are active participants in the listening process, asking questions, paraphrasing, and controlling their emotions and biases in the effort to ensure understanding.

5 Define the different kinds of feedback. Feedback is a reaction fed back to the source of a message, revealing our response. It can be positive or negative, immediate or delayed, person- or message- focused, low-or high-monitored, and evaluative or nonevaluative.

280

Probing, understanding, supporting, and “I” messages are among the nonevaluative forms of feedback.

6 Explain how culture and gender influence listening. Culture affects attitudes toward talk and silence. Gender affects listening style as well as our reasons for listening.

7 Analyze the impacts of media and technology on listening. Media and technology are changing how we listen to one another, including whether we multitask or pay full attention to another person when listening.

CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING

1 Can you distinguish between hearing and listening when describing your role as a listener? What listening style do you believe you exhibit most frequently? Why do you think this is so? (See pages 93–2 and pages 98–2.)

2 Can you explain how the kind of listening in which someone is engaging influences his or her behavior? What kind of listening do you prefer to engage in? (Seepages 101–2.)

3 Can you apply the HURIER model to a personal listening experience? (See pages 95–2.)

4 Can you provide a dialogue (real or hypothetical) that demonstrates one or more listening challenges and the effects of faulty listening? (Seepages 103–2.)

5 Can you distinguish between the different kinds of feedback, identifying what makes each valuable? (See pages 107–2.)

CHECK YOUR SKILLS

281

1 Can you tell when you are hearing but not listening? (See pages 93; and Analyze This, page 94.)

2 Can you identify behaviors that make your listening ineffective and take steps to correct your actions? (See pages 93–2 and 103–2; and Analyze This, page 104.)

3 Can you prevent yourself from turning listening into a dangerous activity? (See Reflect on This, page 99.)

4 Can you use the HURIER model to explain your behavior as a listener? (See pages 95–2; and Try This, page 96.)

5 Can you identify the style and type of listening you are using? (See pages 98–2; and Analyze This, page 104.)

6 Can you prepare yourself to listen ethically? (See pages 103–2.)

7 Can you use and interpret different kinds of feedback, including “I” messages? (See pages 107–2 ; and Try This, page 112.)

8 Can you offer examples of how culture and gender influence your listening and the listening of a person from a culture other than your own? (See pages 111–2; and Try This, page 113.)

9 Can you identify ways in which media and technology serve as listening distractors? (See pages 114–2; and Try This, page 116.)

10 Can you use your skills to overcome listening challenges? (See The Case of Nonlistening Flora, page 118.)

KEY TERMS

Hearing 93

Listening 93

HURIER model 95

Attending 97

Appreciative listening 100

282

Comprehensive listening 100

Critical or deliberative listening 100

Empathy 100

Empathetic listening 100

Empathetic responsiveness 101

Perspective taking 101

Sympathetic responsiveness 101

Nonlistening 103

Active listening 104

Red-flag word 105

Speech-thought differential 106

Evaluative feedback 109

Nonevaluative feedback 110

Probing 110

Supportive feedback 110

“I” messages 111

Dialogic listening 111

Silence 112

STUDENT STUDY SITE

Visit the student study site at www.sagepub.com/gambleic to access the following materials:

• SAGE Journal Articles

• Videos

• Web Resources

• eFlashcards

• Web Quizzes

• Study Questions

283

5Chapter

Almost everything we do that concerns other people involves us in conversation.

–Robert E. Nofsinger

COMMUNICATING WITH WORDS LEARNING OBJECTIVES

284

After completing this chapter, you should be able to demonstrate mastery of the following learning outcomes:

1. Define language, explaining its uses and distinguishing among semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic codes.

2. Explain the triangle of meaning.

3. Distinguish between denotative and connotative meaning.

4. Discuss the nature of word walls, euphemisms, emotive language, polarizing words, politically correct language, bypassing, and intensional orientation.

5. Explain how language reflects social identity and communication style.

6. Identify how language helps express and reinforce attitudes toward culture, gender, and age.

7. Discuss the interface between language and media and technology.

8. Take steps to use language more effectively.

ave you ever been a bully’s target? Bullies don’t only attack physically. They also assault verbally. And because bullies are persistent, those who receive such verbal abuse may internalize the bullies’ messages—taking them to heart.1

The bully picks on a target, using derogatory language to make fun of the person’s name, looks, clothes, voice, sexual orientation, or disability. Maybe the bully calls a boy a girl or a fag, or a girl ugly or smelly. The bully spreads rumors to dehumanize the victim. The bully’s mean-spirited words, whether delivered face-to-face or in cyberspace, can be as powerful as any weapon, leading some who are bullied to want to die, just to escape their psychological pain.

Bullies don’t only attack physically. They also assault verbally.

Tyler Clementi and Dharun Ravi graduated from different New Jersey high schools and, though not acquainted with each other, were assigned to be freshman roommates at Rutgers University. Unfortunately, there was a

285

complete lack of communication between the two. In fact, during the summer before they started college and actually met, Dharun went online to “investigate” Tyler, and he discussed Tyler and the likelihood that he was gay with friends on Facebook and Twitter. Tyler accessed the posts and tweets before arriving on campus and read the rumors Dharun was spreading about him.

A few weeks into their first semester, Dharun tweeted, “Roommate asked for the room till midnight. I went into Molly’s room and turned on my webcam. I saw him making out with a dude. Yay.” Dharun and fellow freshman Molly had used a webcam to spy on Tyler and a male friend visiting his dorm, capturing them sharing a kiss. Tyler subsequently read Dharun’s words on his Twitter feed. He complained to campus officials and ultimately asked to be moved to another dorm because of Dharun’s invasion of his privacy. He also assumed that Dharun had seen his postings on JustUsBoys (a gay website). A few days after he first learned of Dharun’s recording of his intimate liaison, like too many others who have been bullied, Tyler Clementi committed suicide, jumping from the George Washington Bridge. Dharun Ravi was tried for invasion of privacy and bias intimidation. On March 16, 2012, a jury found him guilty of committing both crimes.2

Despite all their online activity, all their tweets and IMs, in the weeks they had lived together the two roommates had hardly spoken a word to each other. Tyler’s suicide might have been avoided if he and Dharun had been able to use words to establish what they had in common instead of to target and stigmatize.3

A dramatic example of the “dark side” of computer-mediated communication (CMC), this sad story reveals the harm that can be done when we fail to recognize one another’s humanity. How much of what was written or said during this episode was rumor—mean, misstated, or misinterpreted? So much of what happens in our lives depends on words and how we use them.

WHAT DO YOU KNOW?

Before continuing your reading of this chapter, which of the

286

following five statements do you believe to be true and which do you believe to be false?

1. Meaning exists in words. T F

2. The personal meaning we have for a word is permanent.

T F

3. You can substitute a more polite word for one that is less polite in order to make yourself crystal clear.

T F

4. Advertisers realize that words do not easily fool us. T F

5. Spotlighting highlights a person’s appearance. T F

Read the chapter to discover if you’re right or if you’ve made any erroneous assumptions.

ANSWERS: 1. F, 2. F, 3. F, 4. F, 5. F

287

Being unable to use words helps understand their importance.

Spoken language is composed of words, and words are what we use to symbolize reality. The words we use reflect and affect our feelings, thoughts, and actions as well as the feelings, thoughts, and actions of others. Our words can comfort, inspire, and make others laugh, and just as easily they can annoy, alienate, and make them cry. We use words to gain interpersonal closeness and to ensure that others keep their distance. Words let us speak of things we have and have not seen or experienced personally, share perceptions of the past, present, and future, and negotiate reality.

Depending on the choices we make, words can clarify or confuse, make meaning apparent or obscure, and cause us literally to miss meaning, humbling us and contributing to our feeling that none of us speaks the same language. Interpersonal effectiveness and word mastery are related. How we use words has an impact on our sense of self and on the nature and development of our relationships. After all, language is the tool we use to form, maintain, and end relationships. Language also makes it feasible for us to cooperate, plan, and share. Without language, we would be far less effective communicators, more isolated, and significantly less social. So, let’s talk about language. Let’s talk about using words to

288

communicate.

True or False 1. Meaning exits in words. False. Meaning exists

DEFINING LANGUAGE

Language is a code or system of arbitrary symbols that permits a group of people to communicate and share meaning. Without the ability to use words to create verbal messages, we would find interacting with one another far more difficult and certainly more frustrating. If we were unable to use words to express ourselves, how would we talk about our relationships, career goals, or dreams? Yet, as we do with so many other important things, we take words and our ability to use them for granted. Often it is only when we are prevented or restrained from communicating with words that we come to value their utility and importance.

We use language to negotiate meaning, which is at the heart of communication. Because words are symbols, in and of themselves they have no meaning. They are letter combinations or spoken sounds that were arbitrarily selected at some point to stand for the things or referents about which we speak. If enough people agreed, we could create new symbols— new words—to use in place of the ones we currently use. The word water is not drinkable. The word dog does not bark. The word love is not lovable. The word snow is not colder than the word coffee, any more than the word coffee is hotter than the word pepper. Meanings for words do not reside in their symbols—their letters or their sounds—but rather in the minds of those who use them. Thus, words are not reality; they merely represent reality. In order to understand each other, we must understand the realities represented by our words. Meaning exists in people, not in words. You have your meaning, and other people have their meanings. To the degree that you and others can negotiate your meanings so that they

289

overlap, you will be able to decode each other’s messages; you will be able to relate to and understand each other. We will use the model developed by two British literary critics, C. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards, to explain this process further, but first we want to get into and behind the meaning of words.

Language: A code or system of arbitrary symbols shared by a group and used by its members to communicate with each other.

THE MEANING OF WORDS

How did the words we use to create verbal messages and communicate develop their meanings? To explain how words came to have meaning, we will set the scene by introducing a trio of language codes: the semantic code, the syntactic code, and the pragmatic code (see Table 5.1).

TABLE 5.1 The Language Code Trio

Semantic Code Syntactic Code Pragmatic Code

Denotative and connotative meaning

Conventions and rules (grammar)

Appropriateness based on cont

Variability through time and place

According to the semantic code, we agree to use the same symbols to communicate. By agreeing on a set of semantic rules, we make it possible for us to understand each other. The semantic code, which we explore in more depth as we proceed through this chapter, establishes that words have both denotative and connotative meaning, that they vary through time and place, and only represent or symbolize reality. Were we to use symbols in unpredictable ways, perhaps arguing over whether an apple is something to eat or wear on your foot, we would be unable to communicate with each other meaningfully.

The syntactic code establishes the conventions that guide our word use. When proper syntax is lacking—that is, when we ignore grammatical rules —we may render our words incomprehensible, even nonsensical. When a person fails to follow widely accepted linguistic or syntactic rules, our

290

impressions of that person may be negatively affected. Until popularized by the music industry, for example, the syntax of the hip-hop community was neither widely accepted nor understood by persons outside the culture, who initially maligned it and blamed it for promoting violence before emulating it. The hip-hop expression “I’m keeping it ghetto,” for example, was not widely understood to mean “I’m keeping it real.”4 Understanding and respecting another person’s mode of expression, regardless of whether we share the grammatical conventions, is important.

Communicating with words works best when all parties understand and use the same rules. To be pragmatic, we coordinate our efforts and cooperate with each other in order to agree on an appropriate code. When, for example, is it appropriate to tell a joke, and what kind of joke may be told? Are there jokes that you might consider tasteless or denigrating to others? How do you know how a partner will interpret your humor? Answering these questions brings the pragmatic code into play. This code requires us to consider the context of an interaction, the interdependent nature of our relationship, and the goal of our exchange to decipher meaning.

The context of an interaction provides clues to each person’s goal.

291

Semantic code: The agreement to use the same symbols to communicate.

Syntactic code: Conventions that guide word use; the agreement to use the same rules regarding word use.

Pragmatic code: The agreement to consider the context of an interaction, the interdependent nature of the relationship, and the goal of the exchange in deciphering meaning.

When we begin by holding dissimilar perspectives, our interpretations of meaning are also likely to diverge. For example, have you ever observed how the same words can take on different meanings depending on the perspective a person holds? Consider this: You work for a software company that is about to fire fifty employees. Your boss walks by and says, “You look like you’ve been through the wringer. Why don’t you take the rest of the week off?” If you feel secure in your position, you would likely understand that your boss is appreciative of how hard you have been working and is rewarding you with a well-deserved rest. If, on the other hand, you fear being one of the fifty about to be laid off, you might view the boss’s comments as the beginning of the end of your employment. If you were in this situation, how would you imagine the boss’s words are meant? What pragmatic rules would you use to guide your interpretation of the messages? What is the chance you would jump to the wrong conclusion? In this chapter our focus is on how words influence thoughts, behavior, and action, so the pragmatic code is sure to come into play. Exploring Ogden and Richards’s model, the triangle of meaning, will help us understand why misunderstandings occur.

Figure 5.1 The Triangle of Meaning

THE TRIANGLE OF MEANING

In their classic work The Meaning of Meaning, C. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards use the triangle of meaning to illustrate the relationships among words, things, and thoughts (see Figure 5.1).5 Their model uses a broken

292

line to connect the word and the thing to which the word refers. The broken line underscores that there is an arbitrary relationship between a symbol and its referent; it reminds us that the word is not the thing, and that there is no direct connection between these two points on the triangle. In contrast, by showing that a direct connection exists between words and thoughts and things and thoughts, Ogden and Richards suggest that we attach personal meanings to words and things. Thus, meanings exist in the thoughts or references that we have, not in the symbols we use or their referents. When you say the word wealth, for example, it does not necessarily mean the same thing to you that it does to another person. Each of you has different associations that you likely attach to the word based on your stored mental images and personal experiences. Thus, it is quite possible for two of us to use the same word or look at the same referent and give it different meanings. No one else will react to a stimulus— whether a word or a thing—exactly as you do, because no one else has had your exact experiences.

The significance of the triangle is clear: Meanings exist in thoughts, not in words or things. For you and another person to understand each other, the sense each of you attributes to the words you are using must overlap. That is, you must both attribute the same meaning to the words being used. When your language is ambiguous or contains what we call word masks, misunderstandings may result. When words wear masks, we are apt to misunderstand them. Although in the short run masking meaning may avoid relationship disagreements, in the long run, when the mask is finally taken off the words, the viability and honesty of the relationship may be called into question.

293

Word walls impede understanding. Have you ever built one?

Triangle of meaning: A model that demonstrates the relationships that exist among words, things, and thoughts.

Word mask: Ambiguous language meant to confuse.

Word wall: Language that impedes understanding.

REMOVING SEMANTIC BARRIERS

When we use language to impede understanding, we figuratively build a word wall. In Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass, Humpty Dumpty explains to Alice how easy it is to build one:

“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’” Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t —till I tell you. I meant, “There’s a nice knock-down argument for you!”

“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument,’” Alice objected.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

294

In the real world, we cannot make words mean whatever we want them to. If we do not consider how another person may interpret our words, we are apt to have problems communicating. Although there are a number of semantic barriers that complicate the sharing of meaning, we can overcome them for the most part by identifying the kinds of problems we face when using language, recognizing when they are present, and taking steps to facilitate—not mask—meaning transference.

DIFFERENTIATE DENOTATIVE AND CONNOTATIVE MEANING

Words have both denotative and connotative meanings. A word’s denotative meaning is its standard dictionary definition. It is the general or objective meaning that members of a particular language community attribute to the word. The more denotations a word has, the greater the possibility for confusion when the word is used. A run in baseball is different from a run in a stocking, which is different from a 10K run. When another person does not understand the denotative meanings of our words, we have a potential semantic barrier.

Connotative meaning, in contrast, is much more subjective, personal, and contextual by nature. Unlike denotative meaning, it is influenced by an individual’s personal experience with a word and its referent. Thus, if the person you are speaking with does not share the connotative meaning you have for a word, it becomes even more likely that a semantic barrier will form. A word can have as many connotations as there are people using it; in effect, connotative meanings are limitless. To understand just how limitless, take some time to explore the meanings that commonly used words such as college, sex, tests, and athletes have for you and your fellow students. (See Try This: Measuring Meaning on page 128.) Because you and your classmates probably do not share the exact same experiences, it is quite likely that you do not share exactly the same connotative meanings for the words. It is important to consider how personal experience influences the connotative meaning carried from person to person, from encounter to encounter.

295

True or False 2. The personal meaning we have for a word is permanent. False. Connotative meaning changes based on personal experience.

RECOGNIZE HOW TIME AND PLACE MAY CHANGE MEANING

The meanings that words trigger in people’s minds may change with time. Just because we used a word one way at a particular time does not mean that individuals born into a different generation or era will use it in the same way or even be able to understand our message. Our language system is open to expansion and alteration. Words may lose old meanings and evolve new ones, sometimes as often as every year.

WATCH THIS 5.1 For a Video on the meaning of words visit the student study site.

Consequently, especially if you are interacting with someone older or younger than yourself, it is important to find out whether the meaning each of you gives to a word matches or misses the other’s meaning. The word gay, for example, is currently an acceptable term for “homosexual” and has all but shed its past meaning of “happy,” “bright,” or “merry.” Consider how three audiences, one of young adults, one of seniors, and one of elementary school children, might interpret the following words and phrases: rap, the net, surfing, tool, chill, it’s brick. The point is that definitions do not necessarily stay with words indefinitely, and because time can affect a word’s meaning, it is important for us to aware of a

296

word’s current meaning.

The meanings of words also may change by geographic region. Thus, a driver whose curiosity causes him or her to slow traffic is called a “rubbernecker” in Texas, a “lookie-Lou” in Los Angeles, and a “gonker” in Detroit.6 Similarly, a soft drink is known as a “soda” in some parts of the country, a “phosphate” in others, “tonic” elsewhere, and “pop” in other regions. Because of such regional differences, in order to determine meaning you have to consider where you are. Unless you are sensitive to how regional differences affect words, you could find yourself facing a communication gap.

Denotative meaning: Dictionary meaning; emotion-free meaning.

Connotative meaning: Subjective meaning; personal meaning.

TRY THIS: Measuring Meaning Below is a seven-point semantic differential scale composed of bipolar terms. The scale, designed to measure how you feel about particular words, is similar to the one developed by psychologists Charles Osgood, George Suci, and Percy Tannenbaum to measure the meaning of words.

1. Score each of the following words using the semantic differential scale below: college, sex, alcohol, and celebrities. Using the word college and the good-bad scale as an example, interpret the seven positions as follows: If your personal meaning for the word college gives you an extremely good feeling, place an X as follows:

If your meaning of the word college gives you an extremely bad feeling, place an X as follows: Good

Proceed in this manner for each word and each polar scale, scoring the four words with four different colored markings on the scale below.

297

2. Fill in the numerical score you assigned for each word and each bipolar set of terms in the table below.

3. Compare your scores with those of your peers. How do your feelings for each word compare? To what extent, if any, does the sex or age of the respondent appear to affect ratings?

SOURCE: See Charles E. Osgood, George J. Suci, and Percy H. Tannenbaum, The Measurement of Meaning, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957.

CONSIDER THE EFFECT OF YOUR WORDS

Words matter. We can choose to use words that are candid and explicit or vague and misleading. Similarly, our words can announce or conceal our true feelings. To influence people’s feelings, we may revert to using euphemisms and linguistic ambiguity, emotive language, polarizing language, or language that is politically correct, depending on our message objectives.

EUPHEMISMS AND LINGUISTIC AMBIGUITY

298

Sometimes we substitute less direct or inoffensive language for language we think may be too blunt or potentially offensive. Such substitutions, called euphemisms, mask meaning by “softening the blow” of a message, but because we substitute a pleasant term for a less pleasant one, they also may obscure or fog meaning and alter our receiver’s response.7 As a case in point, few companies fire people today—instead, employees are “let go,” “laid off,” or “given a pink slip.” While people in most cultures value politeness, there are cultural variations in how important politeness and honesty are. People from Asian cultures, for example, value politeness in interpersonal relations more than do people in the United States. Eager to spare the feelings of those with whom they are interacting, Asians frequently use euphemisms to soften their words’ impact.8

While euphemisms help spare feelings, they may also help to obscure or mislead those we speak with by camouflaging the truth. According to American linguist William Lutz, euphemisms wage “linguistic fraud and deception.”9 Politicians also use euphemisms to soften the impacts of government policies. A tax increase becomes “increased revenue,” a missile becomes a “peacemaker,” a war becomes a “freedom operation,” an environmentalist becomes a “conservationist,” and global warming becomes “climate change.”

The euphemism is not alone in reducing the sting of words; the practice of linguistic ambiguity fulfills a similar function. Purposefully being linguistically ambiguous by saying something that can be taken in at least two ways can help avoid a confrontation. It also can help defuse tense situations, as happened after the United States found itself in a diplomatic crisis with China when a U.S. spy plane collided with a Chinese EP-3E fighter that had been tailing it. The Chinese wanted the United States to issue a formal apology, something the U.S. government did not want to do. The solution was found in linguistic ambiguity—via the writing of a nuanced note in which the United States expressed one “sincere regret” over the incident and two “very sorrys,” one “sorry” for the loss of the Chinese pilot, and another for making an unauthorized landing— expressions satisfactory to both the United States and China.

299

True or False 3. You can substitute a more polite word for one that is less polite in order to make yourself crystal clear. False. Euphemisms help to obscure meaning.

RECOGNIZE EMOTIVE LANGUAGE

In contrast to euphemisms, which we use when we want to mask or conceal our real meaning, we use emotive language to editorialize on our feelings. Emotive language announces our attitude toward a particular subject of discussion. If, for example, you approve of a friend’s cutting back on expenses, you might call her thrifty; if you disapprove, you might call her cheap. If you like an old piece of furniture you might call it an antique. If you don’t like it, you might call it junk. While the behavior or object being described is the same, the term used to describe it expresses the user’s opinion of the behavior. Notice, for example, how your reactions change as the words change in the following word trios describing the same things:

Euphemism: Less direct or inoffensive language substituted for blunt language.

Emotive language: Language that announces the user’s attitude toward a subject.

TRY THIS: Euphemisms and Strategic Ambiguity In the United States we tend to value directness and “telling it like it is.” Still, there are times when, to promote harmony or save face, we consciously revert to speaking indirectly.

1. Provide an example of a time when you chose to use a euphemism

300

rather than speak bluntly. Explain your rationale. What did you accomplish by not speaking directly?

2. Under what circumstances and in what contexts, if any, do you think it would be inappropriate to use linguistic ambiguity? Explain, providing an example. What have you personally accomplished by being strategically ambiguous?

War Defensive response Massacre

Heavy Overweight Obese

Laying off Firing Downsizing

Cheat Evade Use loopholes

Third World Undeveloped countries Backward countries

Aggressor Axis of evil member Superpower of concern

In many ways, the word you select to describe a person or an action becomes more a matter of personal feeling than one of objective fact. Now, using the following statements descriptive of a person, demonstrate how you can editorialize on each description by helping others view the subject either more favorably or more unfavorably merely by altering the italicized word:

She’s messy.

He’s principled.

I’m reserved.

She’s stocky.

He’s tactful.

ACKNOWLEDGE THE POWER OF POLARIZING LANGUAGE

Although the vast majority of cases exist between extremes, the English

301

language can lead us to think in extremes. When you view the world and describe it in terms of extremes, you display a tendency to use polarizing language; that is, you describe experience in either-or terms. How many of these expressions sound familiar to you? “Either you’re for us or against us.” “Either you’re in or you’re out.” “He’s a genius or an idiot.” “She’s either a patriot or she’s a traitor.” Either-or thinking conditions us to categorize experience and people according to polar opposites.

Polarizing language: Language that describes experience in either-or terms.

Our language makes it too easy for us to use polarizing thinking and talk. Just see how easy it is to fill in the opposites for each of the following words:

Fat _________

Happy _________

Bold _________

Brave _________

Tall _________

Then try filling in two or more words between each pair of opposites. That is more difficult, isn’t it? It is harder to find words that express all possibilities, not just the extremes. The world is not black or white, good or bad, beautiful or ugly. It comes in a plethora of shades. Because polarizing leaves out the middle ground, it does not reflect reality; instead, it creates monumental artificial divisions. Overstating the divide between positions causes people to perceive gulfs where none really exist.

302

In the film Borat, comedian Sacha Baron Cohen plays a fictional journalist from Kazakhstan whose uncensored and unexpected dialogue satirizes political correctness.

BALANCE POLITICALLY CORRECT LANGUAGE

The term political correctness, like many other terms, means different things to different people—in fact, it may have different connotations for each of us. For some of us, being politically correct means using words that convey our respect for and sensitivity to the needs and interests of different groups. For others, political correctness means feeling pressured by society to avoid some words for fear of being perceived as offensive to certain groups of people. Still others view political correctness as a form of censorship and a very real danger to free speech. Which of these three views comes closest to your own?

In addition to disparaging a person’s sex, sexual orientation, age, ethnicity, or race, politically incorrect language also may demean a person’s social class or physical or mental abilities. When, for example, one person calls another “white trash” “a retard,” or “a spastic,” the user’s words announce his or her attitude toward the other person while excluding the user from the same group, thereby establishing or enhancing his or her sense of superiority.

Using sexist or non-gender-neutral language is a form of political incorrectness. For example, using the term congressman when speaking about any and all members of Congress ignores the reality that women also serve in Congress. Similarly, labeling someone a fag or a dyke is hurtful and offensive and announces an antipathy toward persons with a particular

303

sexual orientation. In like fashion, using ageist language such as geezer indicates little regard or respect for older persons. Using language that is ethnically or racially biased indicates disdain for individuals of particular ethnic or racial heritage and also reveals the stereotypical images the user holds of the members of groups different from their own. Because they demean and disparage others, words like these promote distance rather than interpersonal approachability. For example, sports teams, corporate advertisers, and educational institutions have long used names such as “Redskins,” “Braves,” and “Seminoles” as well as logos featuring images of severed heads, tomahawks, Indian chiefs, and Indian princesses to promote their brands and sell products. Native Americans object to the use of such names and symbols as racist, and many institutions have recognized their offensive nature and have stopped using them in recent years.

Language can have repercussions depending on the words and symbols used and who is using them. For example, while one African American may, without blinking an eye, casually refer to another African American as a “nigger” and not have that reference taken pejoratively, it is highly unlikely that a white person’s use of the word would be construed in the same way. Members of a group may reclaim and redefine words that were once used to stigmatize or degrade them. One example is the use of the term queer by gays and lesbians to positively reference themselves; also, it has become increasingly common for women to refer to themselves as girls.

The language we use conveys our feelings and attitudes toward an object of discussion, in large measure reflecting our point of view. In effect, we use language to express and shape attitudes.

304

When actor Mel Gibson was alleged to have made controversial remarks characterized as ethnic slurs, civil rights activists called for a boycott of his movies.

BEWARE OF BYPASSING

Bypassing occurs when individuals think they understand each other but actually miss each other’s meaning because one or both are using equivocal language, words that can have more than one interpretation. Instead of making contact with an agreed-upon meaning, their words simply pass by one another, leaving both parties confused.

Two types of bypassing concern us.10 The first occurs when people are unaware that they are talking about the same thing or fail to see that they agree with each other because they are using different words or phrasing. For example, a husband and wife argue vehemently over proposed changes in the health care system. One insists that the health care system needs to be “revamped,” while the other says that is foolish, since only “small changes” are needed. Neither realizes that what one means by “revamped”

305

is what the other means by “small changes.” Too often, we argue because we are unaware that although we appear to disagree, in fact we basically agree. We simply are using different words.

The second and more prevalent type of bypassing occurs when our words suggest we and another person are in agreement when in fact we substantially disagree. While this form of bypassing is often harmless and may even provoke laughter, it can and sometimes does have more serious consequences. Consider that in Britain “knock you up” means “come and see you.” What would happen if a young man visiting the United States from England were to tell his American friend that he will “knock her up” before he returns home?

Again, not all bypassing is funny. During World War II, it was thought that the Japanese had decided to ignore the Potsdam Declaration, which called on them to surrender, when the Japanese announced that they would be adhering to a policy of mokusatsu. It was only after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima that interpreters realized that mokusatsu could also have been translated as “make no comment at the moment” rather than “reject” or “ignore,” as it had been translated initially. The cost of this seeming interpretational error is incalculable.11

Bypassing: A communication problem that occurs when individuals think they understand each other but actually miss each other’s meaning.

Equivocal language: Words that may be interpreted in more than one way.

REFLECT ON THIS: Which Do You Prefer? When members of various groups were asked what words they prefer that others use to describe them, the majorities of respondents expressed the following preferences: older persons is preferred to elderly or senior citizen, gay and lesbian are preferred for men and women who have affectional orientations toward members of their own sex, African American is preferred to black (African American places the emphasis on cultural heritage, while black focuses on a color), Hispanic is preferred to Latino/a, Inuit is preferred to Eskimo, Muslim is preferred to Moslem, Asian is preferred to Oriental, and Native American is preferred to Indian.

306

The reasons for these preferences vary. For example, the word Muslim is preferred to Moslem because in Arabic the word Moslem actually means “one who is evil and unjust,” while the word Muslim means “one who submits to God.” See if you can discover the rationales for the various groups’ preferences for some terms over others.

SOURCES: See M. Schwartz and the Task Force on Bias-Free Language of the Association of American University Presses, Guidelines for Bias-Free Writing, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995; J. Lever, “The 1995 Advocate Survey of Sexuality and Relationships: The Women,” Advocate, August 22, 1995, p. 22–30; Michael L. Hecht, Ronald Jackson II, and Sidney A. Ribeau, African American Communication: Exploring Identity and Culture, 2nd ed., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2003.

See Yii-Ann Christine Chen, “Why Do People Say Muslim Now Instead of Moslem?” History News Network, July 8, 2002, http://hnnr.us/articles/524.html.

Can you create your own cartoon to illustrate the dangers or potential humor caused by bypassing?

A first step in limiting the damage that bypassing may do to our relationships is to develop an awareness that it can and does occur. If it is possible for another to misunderstand us, he or she probably will. With this in mind, make the effort to become “person-minded” and take the time to make sure that your intended meaning has been understood. The

307

alternative is being “word-minded,” which usually results in the protest “I never thought you’d think I meant…” or “I was sure you understood me.” Recognize the responses your words can precipitate. If you anticipate these responses, then you will be doing your part to prevent mismatched meanings from interfering with effective communication.

DON’T BE MISLED BY LABELS

How label-conscious are you? To what extent do you respond to labels themselves, rather than to what the labels represent?

Linguistic researcher Benjamin Lee Whorf notes that how we define a label or situation dramatically affects our behavior. According to Whorf, words help shape our perceptions of reality, at times even determining the reality we are able to perceive.12 Thus, because the Inuit are able to perceive many more different types of snow than have groups that do not live under the same environmental conditions, they have developed many words to label the various types of snow. They have one name for falling snow, gana, and another for fluffy fallen snow, akilukah. Similarly, avid skiers can label and distinguish among a wide variety of snow types, in contrast to nonskiers, to whom snow is simply snow.

TRY THIS: Is it Politically Correct or Incorrect? 1. In your opinion, should an individual pay a price for being politically

incorrect and making statements that some judge to have negative moral and social consequences?

2. To what extent, if any, do you believe that the political correctness movement interferes with our rights under the First Amendment, which was expressly designed to protect unpopular speech?

3. How do you believe we can balance the right to say what we want— no matter how provocative or controversial—with watching what we say so that we do not offend others or speaking without regard for how our remarks might play in another context?

4. How do you differentiate and where do you personally draw the line among politically incorrect speech, unpopular speech, and freedom of speech?

308

True or False 4. Advertisers realize that words do not easily fool us. False. Advertisers count on our being intensionally oriented, or blinded by the labels they use.

At times, the words we use as labels do not clarify reality but obscure it. When we respond to a label rather than to what the label actually represents, we display what is known as intensional orientation. Intensionally oriented individuals are easily fooled by words and labels and as a result fail to inspect what the labels represent. In contrast, when we inspect whatever a label refers to instead of letting the label blind us, we exhibit what is known as extensional orientation. Extensionally oriented individuals are “show me,” reality-based people who refuse to be conned by words. For example, perfume and cologne manufacturers and advertisers take advantage of our tendencies to be intensionally oriented when they give their products names such as Intimate, Brut, and Obsession. They count on us to buy the products based on our desires— whether to become intimate with another, to be perceived as a manly brute, or to be the object of another’s obsession. Other manufacturers and advertisers follow suit with a whole range of consumer products and marketing messages. When we confuse labels with reality, or words with things, we can make major misinterpretations.

LANGUAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS: COMMUNICATION STYLE, WORDS, AND FEELINGS

Language plays an integral part in expressing social identity.13 Our preferred speaking style tends to reflect our values and helps emphasize similarities and differences between us. For example, Japanese and Americans display contrasting communication styles. The qualities valued by the Japanese—reserve, formality, and silence—are discouraged by Americans, who generally prefer self-assertion, informality, and talkativeness. For Americans, a key function of speech is to prevent

309

silence.14 Unlike Americans, who typically use a direct conversational style, the Japanese tend to practice conversational indirectness. From the Japanese perspective, communication failures are the result of receiver deficiencies, not message deficiencies, even when the message contains imprecise and ambiguous words. Because of such culture-based differences, when Japanese and American people interact, there is a potential for tension and bad feeling.15

Intensional orientation: The type of orientation displayed when one responds to a label rather than to what the label actually represents.

Extensional orientation: The type of orientation one displays when not blinded by labels.

ANALYZE THIS: Hurtful Words

Consider these lines from the old nursery rhyme: “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me.” Do you agree with the sentiment expressed? In your opinion, can words do another person harm? How about yourself? Have you ever been harmed by another’s words? Is there any difference between words that are harmful and those that are insensitive? Defend your position with reasons.

For Americans, social conversation helps establish and maintain friendships. Americans use talk to bring themselves and others together. That is, as communication researcher Steve Duck observes, we talk our relationships into being.16 Although the use of language serves an information function—it enables us get things done—it also helps us express our feelings about things and each other. In other words, the words we use to describe subjects or persons also displays our attitudes toward

310

them. We can, for example, refer to someone as a substance abuser, an addict, or a junkie. We can call a person homeless, displaced, or a bum. Our words announce our attitudes. The words mangy animal, adorable puppy, goofy pup, and vicious beast may all refer to the same dog. Our description of the dog demonstrates our tendency “to snarl” (register disapproval) or “purr” (register approval). In actuality, when we use snarl words and purr words, we are not describing anything but our preferences. We snarl and purr about people all the time, don’t we?

Using social conversation, we talk our relationships into being.

In addition to facilitating the expression of feelings, language can be used to exclude or include others in a conversation. Groups of people who share a profession or a culture different from our own, for example, often make use of “ingroup” discussions during which anyone else privy to their conversation may feel quite left out. In contrast, persons who use language that is more inclusive enable everyone present to feel more of a connection to the conversation; they explain terms that may be confusing, translate foreign terms, and use analogies that make it possible for all involved to understand the content more readily.

We can also use language to influence perceptions of power. For example, compare the following statements:

Um, could I talk to you for a second? I probably shouldn’t mention this, and I’m not really sure it’s your fault, but I’m kinda upset about the fact that you didn’t meet with me at the restaurant like you were supposed to. Can you meet me

311

tomorrow maybe? That is, if you’re free?

I’d like to talk to you. I waited for you at the restaurant and I’m upset that you didn’t call when you realized you wouldn’t be able to meet me as we planned. While I’m willing to set another date, you need to be more considerate of my time. Just let me know if you can’t make the appointment. Okay?

Snarl words: Words that register social disapproval.

Purr words: Words that register social approval.

The speaker in the second example sounds stronger, more in control, and more self-confident than the speaker in the first example, who comes across as weak, powerless, and certainly nonauthoritative.

However, we must be careful not to confuse powerful speech with rude or profane speech. They are quite different. Imagine if the second speaker had stated:

What’s wrong with you? You kept me waiting at the restaurant without so much as a phone call. If you know what’s good for you, you’ll never do that again!

Effective wordsmiths state their feelings clearly without being rude or using profanities that could be offensive and damaging to a relationship.

We also enact the principles of communication accommodation theory during interactions with others.17 This theory explains that we adjust our language patterns to reflect how we feel about another person. For example, when we feel positively about another person and want to show our interest in and desire to affiliate with him or her, we may adapt our speech style to match theirs. When this is done effectively, the result is communication convergence. By matching our vocabulary, speaking rate, and use of pauses to those of the other person, we help build our relationship. For example, if you work in an environment where rough or profane language is the norm, mirroring the swearing patterns of your boss and coworkers may enhance the feelings of connection between you and the group.18 When two people feel equally positive about each other, they

312

engage in mutual linguistic convergence.

On the other hand, when you admire someone who does not admire you, your attempts at convergence will be unreciprocated—you may speak in a way you believe will succeed in gaining the other person’s approval, but he or she may then respond by attempting to stress your differences. Thus, the accommodation principle also works in reverse. When the goal is to stress our differences, we may revert to the strategy of communication divergence—that is, purposefully adopting a style of speaking that contrasts with the style of speaking of the person from whom we desire to distance ourselves. How have you used the strategies of communication convergence and divergence in your relationships?

Communication accommodation theory: A theory that asserts that we adjust our language patterns to reflect how we feel about another person.

Communication convergence: The matching of vocabulary, speaking rate, and use of pauses with another as part of building a relationship.

Communication divergence: The purposeful adoption of a style of speaking that contrasts with the style of speaking of a person from whom one desires to distance oneself.

Sapir-Whorf hypothesis: A theory that proposes that language influences perception by revealing and reflecting one’s worldview; language is determined by the perceived reality of a culture.

Linguistic determinism: The view that language shapes thinking.

Linguistic relativity: The view that languages contain unique embedded elements.

CULTURESPEAK

Words can help us share meaning with others. The more diverse our experiences, however, the more difficult it becomes for us to achieve mutual understanding.

One of the key, but disputed, theories concerning how language reflects culture is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, developed by the linguist Edward Sapir and his student Benjamin Lee Whorf, which states that language reveals social reality. According to Sapir,

313

The real world is to a large extent unconsciously built upon the language habits of the group. No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same world with different labels attached.19

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is viewed by some as an expression of linguistic determinism, which means that language shapes thinking, and by others as an expression of linguistic relativity, which means that languages contain unique embedded elements. According to Sapir and Whorf, words are not neutral vehicles conveying meaning but rather tools that structure our perception of reality and participate in the construction of our social world. Not everyone speaks or thinks in the same way. Language is not just the content of talk; it is also the content of thought (see Table 5.2).

TABLE 5.2 Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

Are You a Relativist, a Determinist, or a Nonbeliever?

Relativist Language influences thought and feeling.

Determinist Language conditions us to process experience.

Nonbeliever Language does not influence thought.

According to linguistic relativists, language influences both human thought and meaning. It mediates between the symbols and the ideas they represent.20 In fact, Whorf states, “We cut up and organize the spread and flow of events as we do largely because, through our mother tongue, we are parties to an agreement to do so, not because nature itself is segmented in exactly that way for all to see.”21 From this perspective, language defines, rather than reports, experience. It influences how we think and how we perceive the world.

Those who are extreme advocates of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis believe that we are “at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression” for our society.22 Believing that language

314

determines reality, they contend that language conditions users to process experience in a certain way. For example, the Hopi language has no concept of time as an objective entity. This, according to adherents of extreme Whorfianism, affects the Hopi conceptualization of the world. They claim that the way the Hopi rely on preparation, announcing events well in advance, shows a concept of continuous time, in contrast to the segmented time of Western societies. Similarly, famed speech therapist Wendell Johnson observed that very few Indians in one tribe stuttered. Soon after discovering that their language contained no word for stuttering, he concluded that the reason they did not stutter was that the possibility of stuttering never occurred to them.23

Those who disagree with the premise of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis do so by contending that language does not influence thought. In support of this, they cite translatability and the existence of universals. That is, (1) although languages may differ in grammar and syntax, it is still feasible to translate meaning from one language to another, and (2) there are deep grammatical structures that are common to all languages, as observed by another linguist, Noam Chomsky.24

Despite having its critics, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has influenced the way we conceive of language. Even those who support the hypothesis only weakly and moderately believe that although language may not mandate or determine thought or reality, it does influence us by functioning as a barometer of cultural behavior and offering ways of perceiving and interpreting reality. We may study a culture by examining the words that the members of the culture use. In effect, the languages that groups of people use mirror their experiences. For example, if your talk abounds with words such as text, tweet, and download, receivers are able to learn something about what is important to you and what your culture is like. However, if the culture of the receivers is one that is not as technologically advanced as yours, they might not understand you.

Language affects thought, and thought affects language use. Viewed from this perspective, language does not imprison its users but rather has the ability to influence the perspective its users adopt, reflecting their worldview and affecting how they interpret experience. In Brazil, for example, a country whose economy depends on coffee, many different words are used for coffee, reflecting the product’s importance to Brazilian culture. Similarly, Arabs, who were historically dependent on the camel

315

for transportation, have more words for the animal than do other cultures. According to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, the language we use reflects our worldview, our interests and concerns, and what we believe important.

Language also reflects reasoning patterns and expression preferences. For example, people in Western cultures rely on inductive and deductive reasoning to make and understand points; those in the Arab world rely on the expression of personal emotions and the personalization of arguments. Because of these differences, Westerners may have difficulty locating the main idea in an Arab’s message, and vice versa.25 Arab speech is filled with repetitions that highlight an idea’s importance. Its stress patterns often confuse Western listeners, causing them to interpret messages as either aggressive or disinterested when they are intended as neither.26 Likewise, whereas members of Asian cultures are apt to use language sparingly and carefully, preferring to keep their feelings to themselves in an effort to preserve social harmony, members of Spanish and Latin American cultures eagerly engage in conversation and are typically open and willing to share their feelings with others.27 Thus, our culture influences how we use language.

According to researchers in the field of cultural neuroscience, culture shapes brain activity in addition to language use. They assert that the region of the brain called the medial prefrontal cortex represents the self. For example, when Americans think of the word me— their personal identity and traits—the medial prefrontal cortex is activated. For Chinese subjects, however, the same brain region is activated when subjects think of the word for me as well as the word for mother. Therefore, the research indicates that neural circuitry differs between those raised in cultures that conceive of the self as a part of a larger whole, such as the Chinese, and those raised in cultures that hold the self as autonomous and unique, such as Americans.28

We also need to understand how language functions within cocultures. Cocultures are groups of people living within a society but outside its dominant culture or the mainstream culture. The language within a given coculture will differ in some ways from that of the dominant culture, because it reflects a different reality, including differences in lifestyle, values, and behavior. The special vocabulary that a coculture evolves, its argot, enables the members of the coculture to develop both an identity and a sense of community. In American society, for example, members of

316

the African American and LGBT communities use argots to communicate with others within their groups. An argot enables coculture members to use language to maintain a facade of behavior and to cope with any disconnections between their own group and the dominant culture through humor or hostility. In time, some words developed within cocultures begin to be used by the dominant culture. When this happens, members of the cocultures often stop using them. Thus, argots undergo constant change.

Language is a part of identity. In fact, changing how you talk can influence how you think. Thus, sometimes in studying a new language you also open your mind to new ways of looking at the world.29 The same is true of studying how members of different cultures use language.

Coculture: A group of people who share a culture within a society but outside its dominant culture.

Dominant culture: The culture that has the most power.

Argot: The language used by members of a coculture.

TRY THIS: The Language-Culture Link The advertisements popular in a country provide clues regarding the nature and effectiveness of interpersonal communication there. For example, theorists Richard Brislin and Tomoko Yoshida, authors of Intercultural Communication Training: An Introduction, offer the example of a Japanese ad for frozen breaded pork, the tagline of which, they observe, can be translated literally as “A bento [box lunch] that can be made with an oven toaster: Strong in the morning, delicious at noon.” While this statement may make little or no sense to the uninitiated perceiver, Brislin and Yoshida point out that once you understand the culture, the meaning of the ad becomes clearer:

To fully understand this advertisement it is necessary for people to know that the Japanese take fairly elaborate lunches to work, school, picnics, and other outings, and that it is important for the lunches to look as though plenty of time had been spent on them. Traditionally, women are expected to make bentos for their children, their husbands or, perhaps, for someone they love. If a woman is seen with an elaborate bento, many men interpret it as signifying that she will probably make a good wife. Although things are rapidly changing in

317

Japan, and many working women do not have the time to make bentos, there is still some romantic significance attached to them.… In addition, the phrase “strong in the morning” needs to be understood. The functional equivalent of the phrase in English would be “a morning person,” suggesting that even women who are not “morning people” can appear as though they are with the help of this product.

1. Locate an example of an advertisement appearing in a foreign newspaper, foreign magazine, or online site. Even if you do not speak the language used in the ad, describe your understanding of the ad to the best of your ability.

2. Explain how an understanding of the culture of the people to whom the ad is addressed could contribute to an accurate interpretation of the ad’s meaning.

SOURCE: Richard Brislin and Tomoko Yoshida, Intercultural Communication Training: An Introduction, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994, p. 48–49.

GENDERSPEAK

Language is a prime means of communicating cultural views of gender. Once we internalize the transmitted social prescriptions, we then enact them during our relationships. Language can both express and reinforce gender stereotypes and perceptions of power. It is not neutral; rather, it exerts a significant influence on our attitudes toward the self and others.

LANGUAGE CAN DIMINISH AND STEREOTYPE WOMEN AND MEN

Language, for example, can symbolize a devalued perception of women by presenting the experiences of men as the norm and those of women as departures from the perceived standard. Language helps to shape what we see as “normal,” “appropriate,” or an exception to the rule.30 Consequently, although male generic language, in theory, was once thought to be inclusive of both women and men, research has revealed that many of us interpreted male generics as including men but excluding women.31 While they have faded from common usage, male generic terms

318

such as mankind, businessman, and Man of the Year caused our culture to perceive men as more prominent and numerous than women. To combat such perceptions, many organizations and individuals eventually adopted policies of avoiding the use of male generics and other sexist and non- gender-neutral language.

Similarly, it used to be common to refer to women as girls while refraining from calling men boys, leading many to perceive women as childlike. In like fashion, the highlighting of a person’s sex, referred to as spotlighting, also reinforced the perception that the standard was set by men. Although we rarely hear combinations such as male physician, male lawyer, and male physicist, terms such as the following remain widely used: woman doctor, female mathematician. This practice defines women as exceptions to a norm established by men. Eliminating spotlighting should make it easier to revise gender perceptions.

Language also distinguishes between men and women when our words define them differently. We tend to define men by their independence, activities, status, and accomplishments. We more frequently define women by their appearance and relationships. Defining a person by physical qualities or appearance diminishes that person’s achievements. Definitional biases reinforce the idea of women as decorative accessories whose claim to fame is how they look and the idea of men as capable and qualified individuals whose claim to fame is how they perform.

On the other hand, some have asserted that words are also used to emasculate men by promoting a cartoonish idea of them. They point to the new words invented to describe men’s fashion as examples: manties for male undergarments; mandals for sandals designed for men; manbag, murse, or carryall for a men’s version of the purse or pocketbook; and mewelry for men’s jewelry.32 How do you feel about these terms?

319

True or False 5. Spotlighting highlights a person’s appearance.

False. Spotlighting highlights a person’s sex.

LANGUAGE PRACTICES REFLECT GOALS AND FEELINGS ABOUT POWER

Key contrasts in the communication practices of females and males demonstrate differences in how they use language. In general, men and women use language to accomplish different goals.33 Typically, males use it to achieve something or assert themselves, whereas women use it to create and sustain relationships. Men use language to attract and keep an audience, whereas women use it to indicate they are paying attention. Men use language to compete; women use it to collaborate. For women, talk is at the very core of a relationship, not a means to achieve conversational dominance as it is for men.34

Because women are more likely than men to exhibit an affiliative, or socially based and mutual, orientation, they are less likely to use words to assert status. Unlike most men, who express ideas firmly and then wait to see if someone challenges them, many women prefer to use language to foster connection, gain support, and display understanding. In contrast to men, women are more likely to interpret challenges to their ideas as personal attacks. Since women are socialized to weigh others’ opinions, they also are apt to ask others for their ideas before rendering decisions. Whereas men interpret questions as information requests, women characteristically use questions to keep conversations going. Should a man provide the requested information, the woman typically asks another question, which usually succeeds in frustrating the man. Why is this?

320

When neither understands the other’s behavior, the likely result is frustration.35

The sensitivity women display to others’ reactions probably explains their unobtrusive and smoothing style. In comparison with men, women have a lower threshold for identifying behavior as offensive. This also accounts for why women’s speech is often labeled as deferential, as well as why women are prone to offering ritual apologies—saying “I’m sorry” on numerous occasions every day.36

Differences in male and female orientations result in differences in the structure of utterances. Tentative phrases such as “I guess,” “I think,” and “I wonder if” characterize the speech patterns of women but not those of men. Unlike men, women frequently turn their statements into questions. Thus, a woman might ask, “Don’t you believe it would be more effective to put this paragraph in the introduction rather than in the conclusion?” In contrast, a man would deliver a more definitive statement: “It would be more effective to put this paragraph in the introduction rather than in the conclusion.”37

Spotlighting: The highlighting of a person’s sex for emphasis.

According to linguist Robin Lakoff, unlike most men, women do not lay claim to their utterances.38 Additionally, women’s tendency to add “tag questions” to their comments contributes to their being perceived as more tentative. While a woman may say, “Mel is right, isn’t she?” or It’s a great day, isn’t it?” men usually make such statements minus the “isn’t she” or “isn’t it” question tags. Women also reinforce their reputation for tentativeness by prefacing utterances with phrases such as “This probably won’t matter, but …” and “This probably isn’t important, yet.…” Some researchers contend that such habits further weaken the impact of the messages women send, while others suggest that the tentativeness noted in women’s speech is not a sign of powerlessness but rather reveals their desire to keep conversation open and inclusive.39

321

Age can account for variations in language use.

Linguist Deborah Tannen has coined the term genderlect to describe the different languages that men and women use.40 According to Tannen, the genderlect that women hear and speak is one of connection and intimacy, of seeking to preserve relationships. Men, in contrast, speak and hear a language of status and independence.41

AGE AND LANGUAGE

Just as gender and culture help account for language use variations, so does age. Persons who grew up in different generations may experience more difficulty understanding each other than people who grew up in the same generation. Significant age differences may make individuals more prone to misunderstanding one another or to misperceiving what others are telling them.42

Research also reveals that young people tend to adjust the language they use when they are interacting with older people. Sometimes, younger persons will feel they have to overaccommodate when interacting with someone significantly older than they are. Reacting on the basis of their stereotype of older persons, younger persons may consciously alter their word choices, making them simpler and more concrete, believing erroneously that older persons have a diminished capacity for conversation. Those who are younger also are likely to think they ought to speak more slowly and in a more nurturing tone when conversing with an

322

older person, which often results in making the older person feel childlike and less capable. Because younger people have the tendency to speak to the elderly as if they are incompetent, the older person may soon feel incompetent, which contributes to both individuals, young and old, feeling unfulfilled by their interactions.43

Genderlect: Deborah Tannen’s term for language differences attributed to gender.

REFLECT ON THIS: The Muted Group According to muted group theory, the group that is dominant in a social hierarchy uses language to shape societal perceptions.As a consequence, those who have less power can find themselves repressed by language. For all practical purposes, their voices are silenced or muted.

Those who control language use also are able to control thought and behavior. Thus, when you change the words used to describe or speak about something you also change the discussion. For example, by calling a law that includes significant limits on individual freedoms the Patriot Act, Congress succeeded in silencing those who questioned the act’s contents by implying that nonsupporters were unpatriotic.

1. In what ways, if any, have authorities who have more power than you used language to attempt to mute your voice, and to what extent have you done the same to people whom you perceive to have less

323

power than you?

2. How should we react when someone in power defines a situation as a means of silencing any opposition?

SOURCES: See, for example, Cheris Kramarae, “Classified Information: Race, Class, and (Always) Gender,” in Julia T. Wood, ed., Gendered Relationships, Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 1996, p. 20–38; and Cheris Kramarae, Women and Men Speaking: Frameworks for Analysis, Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 1981.

See, for example, Ann Burnett, Jody L. Mattern, Liliana L. Herakova, David H. Kahl, Clay Tobola, and Susan E. Bornsen, “Communicating/Muting Date Rape: A Co-cultural Theoretical Analysis of Communication Factors Related to Rape Culture on a College Campus,” Journal of Applied Communication Research, 37, 2009, p. 465–485; and Cheris Kramarae, “Muted Group Theory and Communication: Asking Dangerous Questions,” Women and Language, 28:2, 2005, p. 55–61.

Of course, individual accommodations are sometimes necessary. However, even if an older person has a hearing loss, this does not correlate with diminished mental ability. To communicate effectively, we must relate our language to the needs of the individuals with whom we interact rather than basing how we speak on stereotypes. To avoid interacting with an older person in a way he or she could find demeaning, young persons should treat persons of any age group as individuals rather than as members of a social category.

LANGUAGE, MEDIA, AND TECHNOLOGY

As we have seen, how we use language reveals both our attitudes toward and our assessments of the subjects of our discussions and each other. For example, we are more apt to define women by appearance or relationships and men by activities or positions than vice versa. This practice is reflected in countless media examples.

Muted group theory: A theory that proposes that in a social hierarchy, the dominant group uses language to shape perceptions, effectively silencing or muting those with less power.

EXPERIENCING MEDIA

324

Reflecting societal judgments of what is important for each sex, media coverage of female politicians and athletes often contains references to their physical appearance, whereas stories about their male counterparts are more likely to stress their accomplishments rather than their hair, dress, weight, or physical appeal.44 We also see societal judgments affecting story placement, with stories about women appearing more often in the lifestyle pages rather the front pages of newspapers.45 And although strides have been made, even when women have careers as physicians or lawyers, they are more apt to be portrayed in stereotypical ways in the media and defined by their marital and familial status. Unfortunately, such practices can tend to increase sexism.

TRY THIS: How Would You Reengineer a Media Image?

Describe a media representation that you find potentially degrading to you or the members of a specific group.

1. In your opinion, should we be holding the media more accountable for their representations of people of color and various other groups, such as gays, the elderly, and the physically challenged? Explain.

2. If the representations the media offer us were reengineered in an effort to deliberately eradicate stereotypical portrayals, how do you imagine that would affect our daily interactions?

EXPERIENCING TECHNOLOGY

When we interact online, we use words and pictures to encode our on- screen identities: “The way we use these words, the stories (true and false) we tell about ourselves (or about the identities we want others to perceive) is what determines our identities in cyberspace. The aggregation of personae, interacting with each other, determines the nature of the collective culture.”46 We tend to separate ourselves from others online based on our needs and interests, affiliating ourselves with those belonging to communities reflective of our mutual concerns.

As in face-to-face conversation, when you are online the use of language

325

that is inflammatory, insulting, imprecise, or discriminatory can cause problems. What you write, text, or tweet in haste or in anger may reach a wider audience and have more influence than you imagined, causing you potentially serious consequences. For example, when a teacher posted on her Facebook page that she was “a warden for future criminals.” The school board of her district scheduled a hearing to consider whether to revoke her tenure.47 When we are online, we are more apt to share our thoughts without displaying concern for others’ feelings. As this chapter’s opening examination of the Tyler Clementi and Dharun Ravi tragedy illustrates, we are more likely to comment about one another online than to talk with one another. Gossip, sexist and homophobic remarks, and trash talk are all too common on the Web—posted for all to read, no longer merely whispered by one person to another. Because young people are addressing issues of race, class, and gender online, they are also likely to reveal their personal struggles, just as they would offline—but not necessarily to their parents.48

Some people display more enthusiasm when communicating online than they do in face-to-face interactions. Do you?

We send more than a trillion text messages every year.49 Some believe that the prevalence of texting is causing us to speak in shorter sentences

326

and has the potential to wipe out spoken conversation.50 Others believe that our use of textspeak is leading us to speak in acronyms, a form of private language.51 Which of these two positions do you agree with more, if either?

How do your online interactions differ from those you engage in when face-to-face? Some report that they display more enthusiasm during online interactions. Online speech can have a breathless, yet emphatic feel to it— as if users are jumping up and down to capture their receivers’ attention.52

Women’s use of highly expressive language online projects their desire for connection. While men post about sports games and politics, women use social media more like a public diary, revealing personal bits of their lives, such as relating a funny thing a boyfriend just did and posting questions about their appearance (Does this outfit look okay?).53

GAINING COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE: MAKING YOUR WORDS WORK

Taking language for granted can be dangerous. With this in mind, what can you do to master meaning and so improve your relationships? Answering the following questions will help you learn to make your words work.

ARE MY WORDS CLEAR?

Far too often we understand the words we are using, but others do not. If we choose words with the individual we are interacting with in mind, that person will be more apt to respond as we had hoped. Ask yourself the following questions when considering your words’ clarity:

• Are the words I am using reflective of the education level of the person with whom I am interacting? For example, you would not give a lecture containing sophisticated computer terminology to a group of first graders.

• Is this person familiar with any technical language (jargon) or argot I might use with members of my particular coculture? For instance, it would be unwise to use medical terminology when explaining an ailment to a patient.

327

ARE MY WORDS APPROPRIATE?

Our word choice should change as the situation we are in changes and as the individual with whom we are interacting changes. For example, we might use slang when speaking with friends, but we probably would not use it when conversing with our employer or a professor. Whereas obscenities might spew from our mouths when we are letting off steam around a close pal, we probably would censor our remarks when in the presence of a parent, grandparent, or school or corporate officer. Ask yourself the following questions when assessing the appropriateness of your word choice:

• Will my receiver find my words offensive?

• Am I using the right words in the right place at the right time?

AM I USING WORDS THAT ARE CONCRETE?

Our words are concrete when they enable us to describe a feeling, an event, or a circumstance unambiguously—that is, they let us communicate precisely what we mean. When we eliminate vague and confusing words from our conversation and substitute more exact ones, we are able to shape the meaning we transmit to others more effectively. Ask yourself the following questions when evaluating the concreteness of your expression:

• Do my words enable my receiver to formulate a clear picture of my thoughts?

• Do my words communicate my intended feelings?

DO MY WORDS SPEAK TO THE OTHER PERSON AND REFLECT THE CONTEXT?

Many people use words differently than you do. When this occurs, do not assume they are wrong. Rather, remind yourself that their experiences may have led them to develop different points of view or different ways of thinking about something or someone. When you are sensitive to the person and the context, you increase your chances of “talking the same language.”

Keep in mind that the meaning of a word can change from one time period to another and from one culture to another. In the United States, the word

328

apple now conjures images of computers, not just of fruit. In the 1970s, when the Ford Motor Company tried to sell its car the Pinto in Brazil, it failed miserably—at least in part because in Brazilian slang the word pinto means “tiny male genitals.”54 We all use words, just not necessarily in the same ways.

DO I SHARE “TO ME” MEANING?

Words can confuse or clarify, conceal or reveal meaning. When you take time to share your perception of the “to me” nature of language, you let another person know that you are aware that he or she may not be processing experience the same way you are. That person then also becomes more willing to share his or her “to me” perceptions with you.

You share “to me” meanings by eliminating the accusatory “you” from your vocabulary. By using the word I in place of you, you effectively describe your own feelings and thoughts instead of berating others for theirs. This simple strategy also allows you to take ownership of your words. For example, instead of telling a friend, “You are selfish. You didn’t think about how I would feel when you asked Karen to go shopping with you but not me,” you say, “I feel like I didn’t matter when you asked Karen to go shopping with you but not me.”

If you share your “to me” meanings, this behavior will also actualize the communication strategy of dual perspective talking. Once you acknowledge that everyone has a “to me” meaning and that we all own our feelings and thoughts, you take responsibility for yourself. We do not need to give up our “to me” perspective to respect and understand the perspectives of others. Using “I” or “to me” language decreases the defensiveness of others, opens the door to dialogue, and empowers the self.

DO I RESPECT UNIQUENESS?

No two people, events, or things are exactly alike. Student 1 is not student 2. Political rally 1 is not political rally 2. When we talk in generalities, our words can trip us up and lead us to stereotype. In contrast, identifying differences enables us to demonstrate our respect for uniqueness.

Whenever we make a blanket judgment about others, such as “Lawyers are

329

liars” or “Guidance counselors are teachers who just want out of the classroom,” we are thinking in generalities and ignoring differences. Because expecting a behavior can help to precipitate the behavior, we must consciously avoid forming fixed mental pictures of anyone or any group. When we form a fixed mental picture, we fail to notice the unique characteristics that distinguish one person or group from another.

What can you do to ensure you look beyond the category? Indexing generalizations can prevent you from using language to conceal important distinctions between people. When we index generalizations, we acknowledge individual differences within a group. Group member 1 is different from group member 2, who is different from group member 3, and so on. An action as simple as this can help you avoid the problems that stereotyping encourages.

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of the Wounding Words

Like many college students, Aiden gave little thought to how his words affected others. He was shocked to discover that his shouting a few words and then tweeting about it could actually precipitate demonstrations on and off campus. What words had Aiden shouted and tweeted? One day, when he was disturbed by a group of African American students who in his opinion were socializing much too loudly beneath his window, Aiden had yelled, “Shut up, you water buffalo!” He then posted on Twitter about how annoyed he was. Though it was later learned that Aiden had previously attended a yeshiva where the Hebrew term for “water buffalo” was slang for “foolish person,” he was threatened with being prosecuted for racial harassment. Eventually, persecuted by the press, the students who had been outside Aiden’s window dropped their charge against him, and the case died

330

down. However, soon afterward, at a meeting organized to discuss campus sexual harassment policies, one participant, we’ll call him or her Lindsay, used a number of hypothetical scenarios to make a point. Featured in the scenarios were two fictional persons referred to as Ethan Stud and Cara Sex Object. While a number of persons present laughed when they heard the names, others were offended and objected vocally, asserting that Lindsay’s choice of words was sexist.

Answer the following questions:

1. Are some words so offensively racist or sexist that no one should use them? Explain your stance with reasons.

2. To what extent, and in what ways if any, can the words one person uses to describe another person change our views of both the person using the words and the person the words describe?

3. If you were a friend of Lindsay and Aiden, what advice would you offer each?

4. Are you in favor of political correctness? If so, why, and if not, why not?

NOTE: This case is based on the 1993 racial harassment case of Eden Jacobowitz. See Scott Lanman, “Jacobowitz Settles ‘Water Buffalo’ Lawsuit,” Daily Pennsylvania, September 8, 1997, http://www.thedp.com/index.php/article/1997/09/jacobowitz_settles_water_buffalo_lawsuit

DO I LOOK FOR GROWTH?

People and situations change. We are constantly in the process of becoming. Your authors are not the same people they were fifteen years ago; our children, Matthew and Lindsay, are not the same people they were last year. And you are not the same person you were just a few short weeks back. Experiences change us. Just as people are not fixed in time, neither are we or our ideas.

Take the opportunity to allow your words to reflect this growth. Demonstrating such flexibility will facilitate more effective interpersonal communication and relationships. Keep in mind that when you make

331

general or static evaluations of others and situations, you deny the reality of change. Static evaluations limit interpersonal effectiveness by preventing you from acknowledging the changes in people and situations.

Check yourself periodically to see if you are holding on to any static evaluations about people or situations that are no longer valid. Dating your observations will remind you that nearly everything—even the meanings of words and our interpretations and reactions to them—changes with time.

REVIEW THIS CHAPTER SUMMARY

1 Define language, explaining its uses and distinguishing among semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic codes. Language is a system of symbols used by a group of people to communicate. We use language to facilitate social contact, the sharing of perceptions, and the negotiation of meaning. The semantic code consists of our agreed-upon uses of symbols or words. The syntactic code consists of the rules that guide our use of words. The pragmatic code involves the coordination and cooperation necessary to derive meaning.

2 Explain the triangle of meaning. Ogden and Richards’s triangle of meaning illustrates the relationships that exist among words, things, and thoughts. The model specifies that there is no direct connection between a symbol and its referent, underscoring the fact that the word is not the thing, and that meaning exists in thoughts, not in words or things.

3 Distinguish between denotative and connotative meaning. A word’s denotative meaning is its dictionary definition. A word’s connotative meaning is the personal meaning the word has for each individual.

4 Discuss the nature of word walls, euphemisms, emotive language, polarizing words, politically correct language, bypassing, and intensional orientation. When we build a word wall, we use words in a way that impedes understanding and the sharing of meaning. A euphemism masks a communicator’s meaning by substituting polite or inoffensive language for blunt, direct language. Emotive language

332

editorializes our feelings. Polarizing language describes the world in extremes. Language that is politically correct is sensitive to the listener’s interpretation. Bypassing occurs when we think we understand each other but miss each other’s meaning. When we respond to a label rather than to what the label represents, we display intensional as opposed to extensional orientation.

5 Explain how language reflects social identity and communication style. The language we use reflects our values, helping to emphasize the similarities and differences between us, including the nature of our conversations, how we express feelings, and whether our use of words enhances or detracts from our power.

6 Identify how language helps express and reinforce attitudes toward culture, gender, and age. Language exerts a powerful influence on our social identity and perceptions of one another. The language we use to describe one another can cause stereotypes to persist or can foster their eradication.

7 Discuss the interface between language and media and technology. The types of words used to describe people in print, broadcast, and cable media and on the Internet reflect societal judgments of worth and importance.

8 Take steps to use language more effectively. To use language more effectively, we need to ensure that our words are clear, appropriate, and as concrete as possible. We also need to work our way carefully and sensitively through the world of words, be committed to sharing meaning, respect the uniqueness of every individual, and seek opportunities for growth.

CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING

1 Can you provide an example that demonstrates how the triangle of meaning works? (See page 126.)

2 Can you provide an example of how time and place influence word

333

choice? Whom do you believe should be held accountable when problems in understanding occur because of time and place differences? (See page 127.)

3 Can you give an example of a time when the use of euphemisms affected one of your relationships? In what ways does masking meaning complicate things? What about the use of polarizing language or displaying an intensional versus extensional orientation? (See pages 129–131.)

4 Can you create a scenario illustrating how gender and/or culture affect your use of language? Can you create another showing how media and/or technology affect your use of language? (See pages 136–141; and pages 142–144.)

5 Can you put into action a plan to improve your command of words? (See pages 144–146.)

CHECK YOUR SKILLS

1 Can you offer examples of how words help you to negotiate meaning? (See pages 124–126; and Try This, page 128.)

2 Can you explain how time and place figure into your discussion with another person? (See page 127.)

3 Can you identify when and why you or others use euphemisms, emotive language, polarizing language, and politically correct language? (See pages 129–132; Try This, page 130 and page 134; and Analyze This, page 135.)

4 Can you take steps to ensure that you and another person do not miss one another’s meanings? (See pages 132–133.)

5 Can you determine when intensional orientation interferes with your reactions to persons or products? (See pages 133–134.)

6 Can you share how you use words, including snarl and purr words, to

334

express your social identity? (See pages 135.)

7 Can you tell when you or another is using words to emphasize similarity to or difference from someone? (See pages 136.)

8 Can you account for how your language use reflects and reinforces cultural and gender perspectives and feelings about power? (See pages 136–141; and Reflect on This, page 142.)

9 Can you identify how the language featured in media offerings and online may contribute to misrepresentations and misunderstandings? (See pages 142–144.)

10 Can you predict the effects of your words on others? (See The Case of the Wounding Words, page 146.)

KEY TERMS

Language 124

Semantic code 125

Syntactic code 125

Pragmatic code 125

Triangle of meaning 126

Word mask 126

Word wall 126

Denotative meaning 127

Connotative meaning 127

Euphemism 129

Emotive language 129

Polarizing language 130

Bypassing 132

Equivocal language 132

Intensional orientation 134

335

Extensional orientation 134

Snarl words 135

Purr words 135

Communication accommodation theory 136

Communication convergence 136

Communication divergence 136

Sapir-Whorf hypothesis 136

Linguistic determinism 136

Linguistic relativity 136

Coculture 138

Dominant culture 138

Argot 138

Spotlighting 140

Genderlect 141

Muted group theory 142

STUDENT STUDY SITE

Visit the student study site at www.sagepub.com/gambleic to access the following materials:

• SAGE Journal Articles

• Videos

• Web Resources

• eFlashcards

• Web Quizzes

• Study Questions

336

6Chapter

Beware of persons whose bellies do not move when they laugh.

—Chinese Proverb

NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION LEARNING OBJECTIVES

337

After completing this chapter, you should be able to demonstrate mastery of the following learning outcomes:

1. Define nonverbal communication, explain its metacommunicative nature, and discuss its functions and characteristics.

2. Define and distinguish among the following kinds of nonverbal messages: kinesics, paralanguage, proxemics, haptics, artifactual communication and appearance, olfactics, color, and chronemics.

3. Compare and contrast the nonverbal communication styles of men and women.

4. Distinguish between contact and noncontact cultures.

5. Describe the impacts of media and technology on nonverbal messages.

6. Identify steps you can take to improve your nonverbal effectiveness.

he motion picture The Artist received the Oscar for Best Picture in 2012. This mostly silent black-and-white movie won the hearts of audiences and enthralled the critics, all with hardly any dialogue. Most of the communication that occurs in the movie is nonverbal.

The movie’s lead actress, Bérénice Bejo, received an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actress for playing Peppy Miller, a young starlet who in the course of the film becomes a star. In an interview on the experiences she had filming this silent movie, Bejo commented, “I was thinking: ‘How am I going to move, how am I going to speak without using my voice?’ By the end of the shooting, I thought: ‘That’s it, I got it!’ I can’t explain it; it was physical. We give ourselves so much pressure with words. I like it very much that our intention is not conveyed solely through dialogue but by the body, the walk, the attitude, the precision of each gesture.”1

“How am I going to move, how am I going to speak without using my voice?”

The actors did not need to use spoken words to make their characters’ messages clear to us. By observing how the actors moved, by paying attention to their facial expressions, by looking at how they sat and

338

adjusted their heads, we understood them—the actors’ messages came alive. Relying on such nonverbal cues, we connected with the characters emotionally. We can do this in our daily lives as well.

Consider, for example, what these descriptive phrases have in common:

The twinkle in his eye. The edge in her voice. The knowing look of their smiles. The rigidity of his posture. The confidence in her walk. Your hairstyle. Your dress. Where you sit. How closely you stand to another. Your eagerness to arrive.

Each of the phrases highlights a nonverbal cue that offers a clue to the attitudes, feelings, and personality of a person. Despite the presence of such cues, too often we remain unaware of the messages our bodies, our voices, or the space around us sends to others. We simply act and react without considering how actions modify, reinforce, or distort messages.

WHAT DO YOU KNOW?

Before continuing your reading of this chapter, which of the following five statements do you believe to be true and which do you believe to be false?

1. You are a message. T F

2. Words used, not nonverbal cues, are more likely to reveal the telling of a lie.

T F

3. Suspicious people are better at spotting deception. T F

4. Your hands reveal more about your feelings than does your face.

T F

5. Some women purposefully make their teeth crooked. T

339

Read the chapter to discover if you’re right or if you’ve made any erroneous assumptions.

ANSWERS: 1. T, 2. F, 3. T, 4. F, 5. T

This chapter’s focus is nonverbal communication. Our concern is transitioning from what we say to how we say it, for words alone rarely, if ever, lead to our wanting to begin, continue, or end a relationship. By taking time to better appreciate the contributions of nonverbal messages, we take another step forward in expanding our ability to understand person-to-person interaction.

DEFINING NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION

Our interpersonal effectiveness depends on more than words. Nonverbal messages add to or detract from our words. In effect, we become the message, with our nonverbal cues announcing our state of mind, expectations, and sense of self. Our entire beings chatter incessantly, revealing what we really feel and think.

For example, how do you judge another’s honesty or trustworthiness? The meaning of these variables is carried predominantly via nonverbal messages, often without our awareness and not under our conscious control. For this reason, nonverbal messages are less likely than words to be intentionally deceptive.2

Nonverbal communication is expressed through nonlinguistic means. It is the actions or attributes of humans, including their appearance, use of objects, sound, time, smell, and space, that have socially shared significance and stimulate meaning in others. It includes visual/kinesic cues such as facial expressions, eye movements, gestures, and body orientation; vocal/paralinguistic cues such as volume, pitch, rate, and inflection; proxemic cues such as space and distance; olfactory or smell cues; cues provided via artifactual communication and appearance; cues sent via color; and chronemic or time cues.

Although we may send nonverbal messages deliberately or accidentally,

340

their meaning depends on how they are interpreted. Consequently, they fulfill metacommunicative functions, and communicate about communication, clarifying both the nature of our relationship, and/or the meaning of our verbal messages. In fact, researchers conclude that nonverbal cues carry approximately two-thirds of a message’s communicative value. Even when used independently of words, as long as an observer derives meaning from them, nonverbal messages speak volumes. Of course, the amount of information conveyed varies according to their clarity, and how receptive and perceptive the receiver is. Based on interpretations of our nonverbal cues, others may decide if they like us, will or will listen to our ideas, or want to sustain or terminate our relationship. The ability to understand and respond to nonverbal messages helps unlock meaning’s door.

True or False 1. You are a message. True. Since you cannot turn off behavior, you continually send nonverbal messages.

THE FUNCTIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION

As we noted, for us to fully understand the meaning of verbal messages, we also need to understand the meaning of the nonverbal messages that accompany them or occur in their absence. After all, we can change the meaning of our words with the wink of an eye, a certain facial expression, voice tone, bodily movement, use of space, or touch. As our ability to use and interpret nonverbal behavior and contextual cues improves, so will our understanding of interpersonal relationships. Let’s see how this works. What do you make of these examples?

341

Nonverbal communication: Communication that does not include words; messages expressed by nonlinguistic means; people’s actions or attributes, including their use of objects, sounds, time, and space, that have socially shared significance and stimulate meaning in others.

Metacommunicative functions: Communication about communication.

1. The little boy who hides behind his mother as he says, “I’m not afraid of the dog.”

2. The woman who says, “I love you,” to her spouse while hugging him and smothering him with kisses.

3. The teacher who asks, “Any questions?” and fails to wait for a response before moving on to the next point.

4. The child whose eyes are downcast and shoulders are rounded as she says, “I’m sorry for breaking the vase.”

5. The supervisor who, when asked a question by an employee, leans forward with a hand cupped behind one ear.

Each message contains nonverbal cues that help reveal what a person is feeling. As we see, nonverbal cues are integral to communication. As the preceding situations illustrate, they may (1) contradict words, (2) emphasize or underscore words, (3) regulate their flow, (4) complement words, or (5) substitute for or take the place of spoken words (See Table 6.1). Whereas words are best at conveying thoughts or ideas, nonverbal cues are best at conveying information about relational matters such as liking, respect, and social control. To be sure, the meaning of neither verbal nor nonverbal messages should be interpreted without carefully considering the other. Let us review each of the identified functions.

TABLE 6.1 Functions of Nonverbal Communication

Function Example

Contradicting Your face is contorted into a grimace. Your eyes are narrowed and eyebrows furrowed. Yet, you are yelling, “I am not upset!” You are sending a mixed/double message.

Emphasizing You wave your finger accusingly and raise your voice to demonstrate your anger as you say, “It is

342

your fault, not mine.” Your behavior provides the italics.

Regulating After explaining your stance on an issue, you raise and then lower your intonation as you say, “And that’s why I feel the way I do.” This, together with your silence, signals you are finished speaking and another person may comment. Your behavior influences the flow of verbal interaction.

Complementing Your head is bowed and your body posture is slouched as your boss tells you how unhappy she is with your job performance. Your nonverbal cues provide clues to the relationship you and your boss share; they also help convey your attitude toward your boss.

Substituting You run into a friend who asks, “So, how do you like your new job?” You just roll your eyes, using nonverbal cues in place of words.

Double message: The message that is communicated when words say one thing and nonverbal cues another.

THE FUNCTIONS OF NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION

1. Nonverbal cues can contradict or negate verbal messages. When this happens what is said and what is done are at odds. Imagine the man who repeatedly says, “Hold me,” but backs away to avoid being held, or the salesperson that just lost a deal, screaming, “I’m not angry!” Each of these verbal messages is negated by the source’s nonverbal behavior. Each interaction represents a double-message—the words say one thing, the nonverbal cues, another.

2. Nonverbal cues can emphasize or underscore a verbal message. For example, when you raise or lower your voice, or slow down your rate of speech so you can deliberately stress a series of words, you are using nonverbal cues to accentuate your words.

3. Nonverbal cues can regulate or control person-to-person interaction. Using nonverbal cues, we establish the rules of order or “turn-taking”

343

during talk. With eye contact, gestures, and voice we control who should speak next and thus direct the flow of verbal exchanges. The regulatory skills of others influence our judgments of them. For example, if we feel that talking to Eli is like talking to a wall, or that when we talk to Taylor we can’t get a word in edgewise, it may be because we do not get the turns or attention that we feel we deserve when we interact with Eli or Taylor.

4. Nonverbal cues can reinforce or complement a verbal message. With your keys and coat in your hand, you announce, “I have to leave now,” as you walk toward your car.

5. Nonverbal cues can substitute for or take the place of spoken words. When we don’t know what to say to express our sorrow at the death of a friend or a relative, an embrace often suffices. Similarly, when someone asks, “What do you want to do tonight?” a shrug of the shoulders frequently is used in place of “I don’t know.” Often when actions substitute for words, the nonverbal cues function as symbols of the verbal messages because they are widely understood. The up- and-down nod is understood to mean yes, just as forming a T with your hands during a sports event is understood to mean “time-out.”

344

We rely on nonverbal cues to emphasize spoken words.

CHARACTERISTICS OF NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION Nonverbal communication is an essential part of the total communication package. From a nonverbal perspective, you are a lighthouse of information continually sending messages from which others derive meaning.

All Nonverbal Behavior Has Message Value. While we can refrain ourselves from speaking—we literally can shut our mouths—it is impossible for us to stop behaving. Behavior, whether intentional or unintentional, is ongoing.

You cannot stop sending nonverbal messages. As long as someone is aware of your presence and is there to decode your nonverbal communication, it is impossible for you not to communicate. Even if you

345

turn your back on the observer and remove yourself from his or her sight, you are communicating. With this in mind, if someone were to enter the space in which you are now reading, what messages might they derive from your nonverbal demeanor? Are you seated at a desk or reclining on a bed? What does your face suggest regarding your level of interest and degree of understanding?

We use nonverbal cues to signal our attraction for another person.

Nonverbal Communication Is Ambiguous. Although nonverbal cues are continuous and frequently involuntary, others can evaluate them in different ways—that is, what we communicate may be ambiguous and subject to misinterpretation. One nonverbal cue can trigger a variety of meanings. For example, wearing jeans can be symbolic of a relaxed mode of dress or it can be construed as a statement of support for the gay community, as when gay organizations without warning surprise blue jean wearers by posting signs that say “Wear jeans if you advocate gay rights.”

Nonverbal cues may not mean what others think they do. There could be any number of reasons why a person looks at a watch, coughs, or rubs his or her eyes. All nonverbal behavior should be interpreted within a specific context.

Nonverbal Communication Is Predominantly Relational. Many find it easier to communicate emotions and feelings nonverbally. We convey

346

liking, attraction, anger, and respect for authority nonverbally. In fact, our primary means of revealing our inner states, that typically are not readily transmitted using words, is through nonverbal communication. For example, we usually look to the face to assess emotional state. We look to the mouth to evaluate contempt. We look to the eyes to evaluate dominance and competence. We base our judgments of confidence and relationship closeness on our reading of gestures and posture, and we listen to the voice to help us evaluate both assertiveness and self-confidence.

Sometimes we are unaware of the nonverbal cues we send; as a result, we inadvertently reveal information we would rather conceal. Without intending it, our nonverbal messages let others know how we feel about ourselves and about them. As our awareness of our nonverbal communication increases, its informational value decreases. In effect, a conscious intention to manage the impression we convey means that we will do our best only to communicate messages that are in our own best interest.

Nonverbal Behavior May Reveal Deception. When a person says one thing but means another, we can use our deception detection skills to determine that the person’s behavior contradicts his or her words. Under most circumstances, when there is a discrepancy or inconsistency between verbal and nonverbal messages, researchers advise that you believe the nonverbal cues, which are more difficult to fake.3 Deception clues or leakage can be detected in changes in facial or vocal expression, gestures, or slips of the tongue.4 In fact, once strong emotions are aroused, these changes may occur automatically, with our words, body, and voice betraying us by thwarting our attempts to conceal them.

Researchers David Buller and Judee Burgoon have conducted an array of studies in which they ask subjects to deceive someone. For example, imagine you face the following situation:

347

True or False 2. Words used, not nonverbal cues, are more likely to reveal the telling of a lie. False. It is easy to lie with words; it is harder to lie nonverbally.

You and your BFF have agreed that you would see a new film together during winter break. Prior to the break, however, your significant other surprises you by taking you to see the movie you had agreed to see with your friend. What do you do when you return home for winter break and your friend comes over and says, “We’re going to be the last people to see that movie, but I didn’t want to see it without you. Can we go tonight?”

According to Buller and Burgoon’s Interpersonal Deception Theory you have a number of response choices.5 If you decide not to tell the truth you could lie to your friend by telling him or her how excited you are to finally be able to go see the movie. In other words, you engage in falsification by creating fiction. Or you could say, “I changed my mind. Let’s see something else. I heard that movie got bad reviews.” You engage in concealment by keeping from your friend your real reason for not want to go to the film. Or you could practice equivocation by changing the subject and dodging the issue altogether. All three potential responses, however, involve deception. Looking at things from your friend’s perspective, do you think you could spot the deception if you were not the person lying but the person being lied to? Buller and Burgoon believe that we make poor lie detectors. Many liars, it seems, strategically monitor and control their deceptive displays giving us only a 60 percent chance of being able to identify when someone is lying to us.6 In fact, our ability to spot the deception depends on how suspicious we are.

348

Psychologist Paul Ekman, however, believes that with training it is possible for us to become more skilled at detecting dissemblers. Ekman and his co-researcher, Wallace Friesen, identify forty-three muscular movements that we are capable of making with our face. They also identify more than 3,000 facial expressions that have meaning, compiling them into the Facial Action Coding System, or FACS, a virtual taxonomy of facial expressions used to interpret emotions and detect deception. Ekman and Friesen have worked for the CIA, the FBI, and more recently Homeland Security to create experimental scenarios for studying deception that could not only facilitate the counterterrorism work of these organizations but also help their agents correctly identify untruths.7 Paul Ekman’s work was the subject of the pop-culture television program Lie to Me that first aired in 2009 and for which he served as a consultant.

True or False 3. Suspicious people are better at spotting deception. True. Because liars often try to conceal displays of deception, being suspicious gives you an edge in identifying such attempts.

Theatrical and media performances demonstrate how possible it is for skilled communicators to control the nonverbal cues they exhibit, thereby persuading audience members to suspend their disbelief and accept the façade. Yet most of us do not spend weeks, days, or hours consciously rehearsing for our daily encounters. Nevertheless, when interacting with another, sometimes we may wish to misrepresent our real feelings or intentions, perhaps by dressing differently, by lying, or by masking an actual facial expression so that we do not insult or embarrass the other person. In general, we are more successful at such deceptions if the other person trusts us. The more a person plans and rehearses a deceptive message, the more confident the person is, and the less guilty the person

349

feels about the deception itself, the less likely it is that others will suspect or uncover the person as a liar. Some people are better deceivers. For example, some occupations such as the law, the diplomatic corps, public relations, politics, and sales require that professionals be able to act differently than they may actually feel. This can pose problems for those of us trying to uncover deception.

If we are watchful, however, we can improve our ability to detect deception attempts. Unskilled liars leak clues.8 It may be a change in facial expression, a shift in posture, a change in breathing, an unusually long pause, a slip of the tongue, a false smile, an ill-timed gesture, or other leaked nonverbal cue that gives them away (See Table 6.2).

The TV series Lie to Me starred Tim Roth as an expert in body language who assists law enforcement in revealing deception. The program was based on the real-life work of psychologist Paul Ekman with the CIA, FBI, and Department of Homeland Security.

TABLE 6.2 Nonverbal Clues to Deception

When telling a lie, you are more apt to do the following: Smile falsely, using fewer facial muscles than when exhibiting a genuine smile Blink more frequently Have dilated pupils Rub your hands or arms together, scratch the side of your nose, or

350

cover your mouth Shift body posture frequently Articulate and pronounce words more carefully Speak more slowly and say less than you otherwise would Exhibit speech that contains more errors and/or hesitation than is typical for you Raise your pitch Deliver a mixed message

Your lie is more apt to be discovered if you do the following: Intentionally want to conceal your emotions Feel intensely about keeping the information hidden Feel guilty Are unfulfilled by lying Are unprepared and unrehearsed

SOURCES: Adapted from R. G. Riggio and H. S. Freeman, “Individual Differences and Cues to Deception,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1983, p. 899–915; and Paul Ekman and Mark G. Frank, “Lies That Fail,” in Michael Lewis and Carolyn Saarni, eds., Lying and Deception in Everyday Life, New York: Guilford Press, 1993, p. 184–200.

Interpersonal deception theory: A theory that explains deception as a process based on falsification, concealment, or equivocation.

Facial Action Coding System: A virtual taxonomy of more than three thousand facial expressions used to interpret emotions and detect deception.

TRY THIS: It’s Not Just What You Say … We are fascinated with lie detection. Are you able to distinguish a liar from a truth teller? Behavioral slipups can betray those who commit them. For example, if a person is trying to communicate an aura of confidence, but his or her foot shakes uncontrollably, then chances are that others present will determine that the person is anxious or uptight rather than confident or in control.

1. Cite an example of how a friend or coworker’s behavior contradicted what she said to you or to another person. Specifically, what behavior(s) exhibited by the person leaked his or her true feelings?

2. Think of the last time you interacted with someone you thought was

351

telling you the truth but whom you now know was lying to you. What was it about this person’s behavior that initially caused you to believe that he was being truthful, Now, looking back, how many of the following nonverbal clues to deception do you recall the person exhibiting during your interaction? • Pausing • Hesitations • Rapid speaking rate • Self-adaptors, such as touching the face and body • Object-adaptors, such as touching to playing with objects • Deficient eye contact • Averted gazes • Excessive blinking • Pupil dilation • Masked Smiles

3. When have you attempted to use nonverbal messages to conceal your actual intentions or feelings? Were you successful? If you were, what do you attribute your success to? If not, why not?

READING NONVERBAL MESSAGES

To improve your ability to read another person, we explore eight nonverbal message categories including (1) kinesics, (2) paralinguistics, (3) proxemics, (4) haptics, (5) olfactics, (6) artifacts and appearance, (7) color, and (8) chronemics. Though for purposes of examination we will discuss each category separately, the meanings stimulated by behavioral cues falling within these categories do not occur in isolation. Instead, they interact with each other, whether reinforcing or diminishing the impact of the perceived cues (see Table 6.3).

TABLE 6.3 Types of Nonverbal Cues

Messages Are Sent by

Kinesics Facial expressions, gestures, eye movement,

352

posture, rate of walk

Paralinguistics How words are spoken, variations in the voice

Proxemics How space and distance are used

Haptics Different types of touching

Clothing and artifacts

Appearance, style

Color Variations in clothing and environmental colors

Chronemics Using time to communicate

KINESICS: THE MESSAGES OF MOVEMENT Kinesics is the study of human body motion. It includes such variables as facial expression, eye movement, gestures, posture, and walking speed. Valuable communicator information is contained in the look on your face, whether you stare or avert your gaze, whether your shoulders are straight or drooped, whether you lips are curved in a smile or signal contempt with a sneer, and whether your gait suggests eagerness or anxiety.

Face and Eye Talk. Picture yourself as part of each of the following scenarios:

Your spouse has had an operation. You are meeting with the doctor to discuss the prognosis. You search the doctor’s face, looking for clues.

You return home a day late from a business trip. Your spouse meets you at the door. As you approach, your eyes focus on the face of your significant other.

Almost immediately, the face of the doctor or your spouse in each situation could cause you to cry, put you at ease, or frighten you.

The Face. The face is the main channel we use to decipher the feelings of others. Quite simply, faces talk. Chatter oozes out of their every movement. In fact, it is wise to depend on facial cues to facilitate person- to-person interaction.

353

What do faces reveal? Faces tell us many things, including the following:

1. Whether parties to an interaction find it pleasant or unpleasant 2. How interested an individual is in sustaining or terminating contact 3. The degree of involvement of the parties 4. Whether responses during contact are spontaneous or controlled 5. The extent to which messages are understood and shared

The face is also the prime communicator of emotion. Our ability to read the emotions depicted in facial expressions determines whether we will be able to respond appropriately to others’ feelings.

How good are you at reading faces? Do your interpretations of facial expressions have a high or a low degree of accuracy? In general, the ability to read another’s face increases with familiarity, an understanding of the communication context, and an awareness of behavioral norms. Not everyone is good at reading facial cues. Deficiency in interpreting facial cues of teachers and classmates, for example, may even be a factor in unpopularity and poor grades. Psychologist Stephen Nowicki notes, “Because they are unaware of the messages they are sending, or misinterpreting how other children are feeling, unpopular children may not even realize that they are initiating many of the negative reactions they receive from their peers.”9

Since they are the most visible and reliable means we have, we also use facial features to identify others and distinguish one person from another.10 Just as security analysts use faces to identify potential terrorists, crime victims describe suspects’ faces for police artists to draw, parents of missing children describe their children’s faces to authorities, and relatives, friends, and acquaintances describe your facial features to others.

354

True or False 4. Your hands reveal more about your feelings than does your face. False. The face is the prime revealer of feelings.

Kinesics: The study of human body motion.

Aside from identifying you, your facial appearance influences judgments of your physical attractiveness and approachability.11 Additionally, your face affects whether others assess you to be dominant or submissive.12 Thus, we speak of a baby face, a face as cold as ice, a face as strong as a bulldog’s, and so on. What words would you use to describe your face, a friend’s face, or the face of your significant other?

The Eyes. “Shifty eyes.” “Goo-goo eyes.” “The evil eye.” “Eye to eye.” Eye behaviors are a key part of interpersonal communication, as we use our eyes to establish, maintain, and terminate contact. As with all nonverbal cues, the messages you send with your eyes may be interpreted in a variety of ways, but there are three central functions eye movements serve:

1. Eyes reveal the extent of interest and emotional involvement. 2. Eyes influence judgments of persuasiveness and perceptions of

dominance or submissiveness. 3. Eyes regulate person-to-person interaction.

The pupils of our eyes are a reliable indicator of emotion. When we take an interest in what another is saying, our blinking rate decreases and our pupils dilate. Of course, the opposite is equally true. When we are uninterested, our pupils contract.13 Similarly, our pupils dilate when we experience a positive emotion and contract when we experience a negative one. They rarely, if ever, lie, because regulating pupil size is a nonverbal cue beyond our conscious control.

355

Looking others in the eye can help you appear more honest and credible

In order for others to find you persuasive, you must refrain from excessive blinking and maintain a steady gaze, that is, neither look down nor look away from the person(s) you are trying to convince; also, you must not exhibit eye flutter. In some cultures, including Arabic, Latin American, and southern European cultures, individuals judge those who look them in the eye as more honest and credible than those who do not. In American culture, when others avoid meeting our eyes or avert their gaze, we are likely to assume that they have something to hide, they lack confidence, or they are unknowledgeable on some matter.14

Visual dominance correlates with increased eye contact, whereas frequently averted eyes generate impressions of submissiveness. Like apes, human can “stare down” each other to establish dominance. Look away first, and you may well find that you have become the less powerful player in an interaction. However, again it is important not to draw a wrong conclusion based on a cultural misunderstanding.

Eye contact also indicates whether a communication channel is open. It is much easier to avoid interacting if we have not made eye contact, because once we do, interaction virtually becomes an obligation.15 When we like one another or want to express our affection, we also increase our eye contact.

FIGURE 6.1 Eye Movements and Cognitive Processing

356

The eyes provide another cue we can use to enhance the establishment of behavior synchrony or behavioral mirroring with another in an effort to establish or advance our relationship. We establish behavioral synchrony by using nonverbal cues that are in sync with the other person’s. According to Richard Bandler and John Grinder, a relationship exists between eye movements and thought or cognitive processing—including whether a person is primarily a visual, auditory, kinesthetic, or emotional processor. As a result of their research, Bandler and Grinder were able to identify eye movement patterns and their meanings for right-handed people (the reverse tends to be true for left-handed people) (see Figure 6.1). Since such eye movements reflect a person’s preferred sensory modality, you can use them to get on the same wavelength and promote interaction between you— increasing interpersonal intimacy.

While their work is controversial, Bandler and Grindler contend that you can also use eye movements to determine how truthful a person is. If, for example, a person is describing an event experienced firsthand, the person’s eyes should move primarily to his or her left (if the person is right-handed), suggesting memory access. If, however, the person looks up and to the right a lot, it may be that he or she is constructing the experience, not recalling it.16 In addition to providing a window into the soul, revealing a person’s emotions to others, the eyes may offer a window into whether or not a person is telling the truth.

357

Putting on a Face: The Ethics of Face-Work. “Put on a happy face!” instructs a once popular song. Have you ever followed such advice when you did not feel happy inside? Could others tell you were not really happy?

Representational facial expressions: Exhibited racial expressions that communicate genuine inner feelings.

When we use our facial expressions to communicate genuine inner feelings, we exhibit representational facial expressions.17 Conversely, when we consciously control our face to communicate a message meant only for public consumption, for all practical purposes we are giving a performance; hence, our facial expressions are labeled presentational facial expressions. It is when we consciously control our facial expressions that we likely are engaging in interpersonal deception.

ANALYZE THIS: Facecrime

In his classic novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, author George Orwell alludes to the practice of masking facial expressions in order not to let those in authority know what you are really thinking. The citizens of Orwell’s dystopia know that the smallest movement could betray them. Afraid to commit a “facecrime,” they make great efforts not to look nervous for fear others will think they have something to hide. They seek to communicate only state-sanctioned feelings; any citizens who fail at this place themselves in danger of being arrested.

Such concerns, of course, have become a part of real life in the twenty- first century. In fact, recently the U.S. Department of Homeland

358

Security had airport security professional trained in how to detect faked facial expressions. However, while we may try to conceal our real feelings, it is not typically because we fear the state’s retribution, but instead because we fear that others may not approve of them or may be hurt by them.

1. Can you remember a time when you (or someone near you) were called out for committing a facecrime? What might have led you or the other person to commit the act? What was the outcome?

2. Should the concept of facecrime exist? Explain your position.

SOURCE: George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), New York: New American Library, 1983.

What techniques do we use to “put on a face”? First, we may qualify our facial expression—that is, we add another expression that modifies the impact of the original expression. Second, we may modulate our facial expression; we simply change it to reflect feelings that are somewhat more or less intense than what we actually feel. Third, we may falsify directly. This requires that we simulate an unfelt emotion, neutralize an emotion by showing none when we actually feel some emotion, or mask a felt emotion by displaying one that we do not really feel.18 Which of these techniques have you caught yourself using?

When we fake a face, usually we leave an array of clues for astute observers. For example, our “face-work” may lack spontaneity or be out of sync with our words or actions, or we may exhibit involuntary cues, in which an expression appears on our face for only a fraction of a second. What begins as a smile becomes ever so briefly a grimace and then is reengineered back into a smile. We call these fleeting emotional changes, lasting no more than one-eighth to one-fifth of a second, microfacial or micromomentary expressions. Such expressions reveal our emotional states and typically occur when we attempt to disguise or conceal those states. Thus, a twitch of the mouth or the eyebrow can suggest that the emotion being communicated is not the emotion actually being felt.

Sometimes the simple act of smiling actually evokes a positive mood change in the person smiling. Still, the degree to which people demonstrate susceptibility to deliberately engineered facial expressions varies greatly.

359

On the other hand, the total lack of the physical ability to smile, a condition called Möbius syndrome, leaves one with a perpetually grumpy look, making it difficult for individuals afflicted to experience normal interpersonal relationships. Though it may be unintended, the lack of a smile causes others to perceive the unsmiling person as unfriendly or bored.19

Presentational facial expressions: Facial expressions that are consciously controlled.

Microfacial/micromentary expression: An expression lasting no more than one-eighth to one-fifth of a second that usually occurs when an individual consciously or unconsciously attempts to disguise or conceal an emotion and that reveals an actual emotional state.

Gestures and Posture: The Body in Motion and at Rest. We move and stand in distinctive ways—so distinctive that often others can identify us by our characteristic walk or posture. The movements and alignment of our body communicate. Although some of our body’s messages facilitate effective person-to-person interaction, others—whether sent consciously or unconsciously—impede it. What kinds of cues do different bodily movements send?

Cue Categories. Paul Ekman and Wallace Friesen identify five categories of nonverbal behavior that we can use to describe bodily cues: emblems, illustrators, regulators, affect displays, and adaptors.20 We explore each in turn in the following (see also Table 6.4).

TABLE 6.4 Types of Bodily Cues

Cue Category

Description Examples

Emblems Deliberate body movements that can translate into speech

Thumbs-up, wave hello

Illustrators Body cues that support or reinforce speech

Direction pointing

Regulators Intentional cues to influence turn taking

Head nods, breaking eye

360

contact

Affect displays

Unintentional movements of the body that reflect emotional states of being

Slumping body; relaxed, confident body

Adaptors Unintentional movements that are frequently interpreted as signs of nervousness

Nose scratches, hair twirling

Emblems are movements of the body that are consciously sent and easily translated into speech, such as a wave that means “come here,” a thumbs- up gesture that means “okay,” and a wave that means “hello” or “good- bye.” We most frequently use emblems when noise or distance makes it less feasible that we will be understood through the use of words alone. Traders on the floor of a stock exchange and sports umpires and coaches on the playing field use emblems regularly; for them, emblems compose a gesture system.21

Illustratorsare bodily cues designed to enhance receiver comprehension of speech by supporting or reinforcing it. As we do with emblems, we use illustrators consciously and deliberately. For example, when you give someone directions, you use illustrators to facilitate your task. When you want to stress the shortness of a member of a basketball team compared to the average height of team members, you use your hands to emphasize the difference.

Regulatorsare cues we use intentionally to influence turn taking— who speaks, when, and for how long. For example, gazing at someone talking to you and nodding your head usually encourages the person to continue speaking, while leaning forward in your seat, tensing your posture, and breaking eye contact traditionally signals that you would like a turn. If we ignore or remain unaware of another’s use of regulators, the other person may accuse us of rudeness or insensitivity. Your use or misuse of regulators reveals much about your social skills.22

Emblems: Deliberate movements of the body that are consciously sent and easily translated into speech.

Illustrators: Bodily cues designed to enhance receiver comprehension of speech by supporting or reinforcing it.

361

Regulators: Communication cues intentionally used to influence turn taking and to control the flow of conversation.

The person in this picture is using an illustrator to clarify the directions he is giving.

TRY THIS: The Ethics of Impression Creation Trial consulting is a growing industry. Hired usually by defense attorneys, trial consultants work with defendants and witnesses to ensure that the nonverbal behaviors they exhibit help them create as favorable an impression as possible on the jury.

Similarly, career, college, and political consultants work with individuals like you to help present each person in as favorable a light as possible in situations such as interviewing for a job or for admission to graduate school or campaigning for public office.

1. Imagine you have been hired as a consultant to help in building a more successful image for you. What changes would you suggest regarding your nonverbal behavior?

2. In your opinion, is it ethical to employ consultants to work with individuals on their nonverbal displays just to ensure they make a positive impression on others? In other words, should consultants be helping others, including criminal defendants, politicians, and job applicants, to appear more credible, confident, and likable than they actually are? Explain your position.

362

Affect displays are movements of the body that reflect emotional states of being. While our face, as we have noted, is the prime indicator of the emotion we are experiencing, it is our body that reveals the emotion’s intensity. Typically, we are less aware of our affect displays because often we do not intend to send many of them. People who “read” our bodies on the basis of its demeanor can judge how we genuinely feel.23 For example, you might describe another person’s body as slumping and defeated, still and motionless, relaxed and confident, or proud and victorious. Those of us who characteristically show a lack of affect or feeling make it especially difficult for others to relate to us meaningfully.

As we do with affect displays, we unintentionally use adaptors that involuntarily reveal information about our psychological state at the same time they meet our own physical or emotional needs. Adaptors include movements such as nose scratches, hand over lips, chin stroking, and hair twirling. Individuals interacting with us or observing us interpret these as signs of nervousness, tension, or lack of self-assurance.

Decoding the Body’s Messages. Others form impressions of us and may judge us to be more or less likable, assertive, or powerful based on observations of our physical behavior. Watching a person’s body can help us answer questions such as the following:

Do individuals like or dislike one another? When we like each other, we tend to exhibit open postures and more direct body orientation, and we stand more closely together than when we do not. Our bodies are also relatively relaxed, and our gestures are uninhibited and natural. Such cues tend to stimulate interaction. In contrast, if we do not like each other, our bodies emit very different cues. Instead of facing each other directly, we exhibit incongruent and indirect body orientations. We are also likely to avoid sustained eye contact and display a high degree of bodily tension and rigidity. It is harder to like someone who is closed off or all wrapped up in him- or herself.

Is a person being assertive or nonassertive? An assertive person’s nonverbal behavior is more relaxed and expansive than the nonverbal behavior of someone who is nonassertive.

363

Affect displays: Unintentional movements of the body that reflect the intensity of an emotional state of being.

Adaptors: Unintentional movements of the body that reveal information about psychological state or inner needs, such as nervousness.

Typically, a nonassertive person adopts a rigid posture, exhibits an array of nervous gestures, avoids sustained eye contact, and hunches his or her shoulders in a protective or closed stance. In contrast, the assertive counterpart exhibits comfortable eye contact and employs illustrators in place of confidence-deflating adaptors that announce vulnerability.

WATCH THIS 6.1 For a video on effective nonverbal cues visit the student study site.

Is an individual powerful or powerless? If you have an erect but relaxed posture, gesture dynamically, feel free to stare at others, and interject your own thoughts even if it means interrupting another person, you are likely to be perceived as powerful. On the other hand, visible bodily tension, a downward gaze, and closed posture will contribute to perceptions of you as powerless.

Thus, whether or not we want to approach or avoid another person, and whether we assess him or her to be confident or anxious, powerful or powerless, is often influenced by the bodily cues we receive. Our bodies talk constantly about how we feel about ourselves and how we feel about others. Even when we try to “stonewall” someone in an effort to cut off our communication, our body continues talking.

PARALINGUISTICS: THE MESSAGES OF THE VOICE The messages that you send with your voice are known as paralanguage. Often it is not what you say but how you say it that determines an interaction’s outcome. We rely on vocal cues to help us determine the real meaning of spoken words. Such cues are especially important when we are deciding whether someone is being sarcastic. The words “Yeah, right” convey different meanings depending on whether they are spoken sincerely or sarcastically, and our interpretation of these words influences how we respond to the person who said them.

364

The sound of your voice affects how others respond to your words.

The tone of your voice can help you communicate what you mean to convey, or it can reveal thoughts you mean to conceal. It can reinforce or negate the words you speak. The sound of your voice communicates, revealing to others your emotional state, attitudes, personality, status, and interaction maintenance, or turn-taking, needs. How you speak influences how others interpret your intentions, as well as how credible, intelligent, or attractive they judge you to be.24 With this in mind, respond to the following questions:

• Does my voice enhance or detract from the impression I make?

• Does my voice support or contradict my intended meaning?

• If I were interacting with me, would I want to listen to the sound of my voice?

Paralanguage: Messages sent using only vocal cues.

Among the elements of paralanguage are pitch, volume, rate, articulation, pronunciation, hesitations, and silence. Each plays a part in the impressions others form of you.

Pitch. Pitch is the highness or lowness of the voice; it is similar to pitch on a musical scale. We associate higher pitches with female voices and lower pitches with male voices. We also develop vocal stereotypes. We associate

365

low-pitched voices with strength, sexiness, and maturity, and high-pitched voices with helplessness, tension, and nervousness. Although we each have a modal or habitual pitch—one that we use most frequently when we speak—we also vary our pitch to reflect our mood and interest in conversing. For example, we often lower our pitch when sad and raise it when excited. In contrast, if we are bored, we may speak in a monotone that reflects our lack of interest. A lively animated pitch encourages interaction, whereas a monotone discourages it.

It is the voice’s pitch that others use to determine whether you are making a statement or asking a question or whether you are expressing concern or conviction. Your pitch expresses your emotional state; for instance, it can communicate anger or annoyance, patience or tolerance.

Volume. The power of your voice, its loudness or volume, also affects perceptions of intended meaning. While some whisper their way through encounters, others blast through them. An individual who is typically loud may alienate others; such a person is often viewed as overbearing or aggressive. In contrast, if you are soft-spoken, others may interpret your behavior as timidity. Thus, your volume can over- or underwhelm, thereby causing others to turn you off in an effort to turn you down or to lose interest in your words simply because they cannot Comfortably hear them.

Effective Interpersonal Communicators Regulate Volume in an Effort to Promote Meaningful Interaction. Your volume should reflect the nature of your message, the size and acoustics of the space you are in, your proximity to the other person, and any competing noise or conversations. Typically, we increase volume to stress particular words and ideas and to reflect the intensity of our emotions. Similarly, a sudden decrease in volume can add suspense or sustain another’s attention. Volume that is varied is most effective.

Rate. Speaking rate is the third vocal cue affecting the communication of meaning. Most of us speak at an average rate of 150 words per minute. When we speed up our speech, exceeding 275 to 300 words per minute, it is difficult for others to comprehend what we are saying, and our message thus becomes virtually unintelligible. In contrast, if we speak too slowly, others may perceive us as tentative or lacking in confidence or intelligence. An overly deliberate speaking pace contributes to boredom, lack of attentiveness, and unresponsiveness in others. Rate also affects others’ judgment of our intensity and mood. As your rate increases, so do

366

assessments of your level of emotional intensity.25 When talking about more serious subjects, we often slow down; on the other hand, our speaking rate usually accelerates as we shift to talking about lighter topics. In many ways, rate reflects the pulse of your words. It quickens to relay agitation, excitement, and happiness, and it falls to convey seriousness, serenity, or sadness.

Articulation and Pronunciation. The sound attributes of articulation and pronunciation affect message intelligibility as well as perceptions of credibility. Articulationis the way you pronounce individual sounds. Ideally, even during person-to-person contact, the sounds of your speech are sharp and distinct. When you fail to utter a final sound (a final t or d, for example), fail to produce the sounds of words properly, or voice a sound in an unclear, imprecise way (come wimme versus come with me, dem versus them, idear versus idea), perceptions of your credibility drop.

Articulation: How individual words are pronounced.

REFLECT ON THIS: Ummmmmmm …

Psychologist Nicholas Christenfeld sought to figure out why we insert the sound um into our speech—especially when most of us believe it makes us sound fuzzy-headed. Christenfeld asked, “Why do people say ’um’ instead of sitting quietly—given that people don’t admire people who um?” According to Christenfeld, such utterances signal our desire to speak—though words may elude us. An um is also, he believes, a sign that the speaker is weighing verbal options and ideas. He claims that these pauses are universal and that we all use several hundred filled pauses-using fillers such as um, er, and like—every day, and sometimes as many as nine hundred in an hour. Is it possible?

367

1. Count the number of ums you utter during a specific one-hour period. Try not to become too self-conscious while you are counting.

2. Begin counting ums and related nonfluencies spoken by those you interact with. How many do you estimate each of these persons utters per minute?

3. How does a person’s “umming” affect your perception of his or her credibility and likability?

SOURCE: Cited in Nora Zamichow, “Professor, Um, Studies, Um, Why We’re Tongue Tied,” Los Angeles Times, April 27, 1992.

While the focus of articulation is on the production of speech sounds, the focus of pronunciation is on whether you say the words themselves correctly. When you mispronounce a word, you may suffer a loss of credibility, and those listening to you may find it more difficult to make sense of what you are saying.

Hesitations and Silence. Hesitations and silence are the final paralinguistic variables we will consider here. Knowing when to pause is a critical skill. When nervous or tense, we may exhibit a tendency to fill all pauses, often by inserting meaningless sounds or phrases such as uh, you know, or okay in the effort to fill voids. These nonfluencies, or hesitation phenomena, disrupt the natural flow of speech and adversely affect how others perceive your competence and confidence.

In addition to slowing the rate of speech and emphasizing key ideas, brief periods of silence or pauses give us a chance to gather our thoughts. This is not to suggest that a pause’s message is always positive. Sustained pauses—significantly extended periods of silence—allow us to give another the “silent treatment,” a means by which we ignore a person, saying to him or her without using words, “As far as I am concerned, you do not exist.” We also tend to become silent during moments of extreme anxiety or annoyance.

PROXEMICS: SPACE AND DISTANCE TALKS Our use of space and distance also reveals how we feel about ourselves and what we think of others. As with kinesics and paralinguistics, space

368

and distance communicate.

Pronunciation: The conventional treatment of the sounds of a word.

Nonfluencies: Hesitation phenomena; nonlinguistic verbalizations.

Generally, we use physical proximity and distance to signal either desire to communicate or disinterest in communicating. The closer we stand, the greater the chances are that we like one another. Proximity or lack of it also indicates how dominant or submissive we are in a relationship. The more dominant we feel, the more likely we are to move closer to another; in contrast, the more submissive we feel, the less likely we are to decrease our interaction distance. Perceptions of friendliness or unfriendliness and extroversion or introversion, as well as our privacy and social contact needs, are also reflected in our spatial relationships. As we study how we use space and distance to communicate, keep in mind that a gap may exist between the messages we intend to send using space and distance and the messages that others actually receive and interpret.

The father of proxemics research, Edward T. Hall, coined the term proxemics to indicate that “proximity” influences human interaction. The word itself refers to how we use the personal space around us as we interact with others as well as how we structure the space around us in our homes, offices, and communities (territory).26

Spatial Relationships: Near or Far. Hall identified four distances that distinguish the kinds of interactions we have and the relationships we share during them (it should be noted that Hall’s research involved only white Americans):

Intimate distance Contact to 18 inches

Personal distance 18 inches to 4 feet

Social-consultative distance 4 to 12 feet

Public distance 12 feet to the limit of sight

369

Intimate distance ranges from skin contact to 18 inches from another person. At this distance physical touching is normal. While we usually share such closeness with those we trust and with whom we share an emotional bond, this is also the distance used for physical combat and sexual harassment. For example, have you ever had someone physically “in your face” to the point that you wished he or she would just “back off”? At times, in crowded spaces such as elevators, buses, or theater lobbies, we have to put up with intimate distance between ourselves and strangers—people we would not ordinarily stand so near.

The amount of distance we maintain between us reveals the nature of our relationship.

Personal distance, which ranges from 18 inches to 4 feet, is less proximate or personal than intimate distance. While we can still hold or shake the hand of another at this distance, we are most likely merely to converse informally. We use this distance at social events such as receptions or when talking between classes or during coffee breaks. If we unilaterally close the gap between personal and intimate distance, we may make the person we are interacting with feel uncomfortable. On the other hand, if we widen the distance between us, we may make him or her feel rejected.

Proxemics: The study of how space and distance are used to communicate.

Intimate distance: From skin contact to 18 inches from another person; the distance usually used by people who trust each other or who share an

370

emotional bond or closeness.

Personal distance: distance: From 18 inches to 4 feet from a person; the distance at which we are most apt to converse informally.

Social distance extends from 4 feet to 12 feet. At this distance we are less apt to talk about personal matters, more able to keep another at arm’s length, and thus more likely to conduct business or discuss issues that are neither private nor of a personal nature. Many of our discussions during meals, conferences, or meetings are held within social distance range. Often we use objects such as desks or tables to maintain appropriate distance in these settings. Usually, the more distance we keep between us, the more formal our interaction becomes.

Public distance (12 feet and beyond) is the distance we use to remove ourselves physically from interaction, to communicate with strangers, or to address large groups. Public distance is much less likely than smaller distances to involve interpersonal communication.

People from different cultures maintain the same four categories, but not necessarily the same distances. For example, Latin Americans use the smallest conversational space, European Americans use more space than Latin Americans do, and African Americans use even more impersonal space than European Americans do.27 In addition, as common sense tells us, cultural and family backgrounds also influence our use of space and personal body boundaries. Unlike the United States, where land tends to be plentiful and family size averages three or four, in countries where land is scarcer and families are larger, people live in tighter spaces, spaces that by our standards might be small or confining.

What happens when we violate distance norms? Expectancy violation theory researchers tell us that the outcomes of such violations can be positive. For example, if we perceive the approaching person closing the distance between us as attractive or a high-reward source, our evaluation of him or her may become more favorable, especially if the distance violation is accompanied by other behaviors, such as compliments.28 More frequently, however, we may feel uncomfortable or violated when another person invades our personal space.

Understanding proxemics affords us opportunities to improve our relationships. By becoming aware of how space communicates, we attune

371

ourselves to the nature of acceptable and unacceptable proxemic behavior. Although some studies reveal that “spatial invasions” may, under some conditions, achieve positive outcomes, we ought not be too quick to dismiss the fact that spatial violations have also led to lawsuits and violence.

Places and Their Spaces: Decoding the Environment. Three kinds of environmental space concern us: fixed-feature space, semi-fixed-feature space, and informal space (see Table 6.5).29 Each affects communication in different ways.

Fixed-feature space involves the permanent characteristics of an environment—including walls, doors, built-in cabinets, windows, in- ground pools, roads, and paths—that functionalize it and determine how we will use it. For example, window placement often determines the front of a classroom, swimming pools provide opportunities for increased interaction, and aisles in shopping malls and stores route customers in an effort to promote sales.

TABLE 6.5 It’s about Space

Type of Space Represented by Example

Fixed-feature space Permanent characteristics of the environment

Walls, Doors

Semi-fixed-feature space

Movable objects Plants, Furniture

Informal or non- fixedfeature space

Our space Personal bubble

Social distance: From 4 feet to 12 feet from another person; the interpersonal distance we usually use to conduct business or discuss nonpersonal issues.

Public distance: A distance of 12 feet and beyond; the distance we use to remove ourselves physically from interaction, to communicate with strangers, or to address large groups.

Expectancy violation theory: A theory that addresses our reactions to

372

nonverbal behavior and notes that violations of nonverbal communication norms can be positive or negative.

Fixed-feature space: Space as defined by the permanent characteristics of an environment.

Semi-fixed-feature space uses movable objects such as furniture, plants, temporary walls, and paintings to identify boundaries and either promote or inhibit interaction. For instance, desks can reduce contact, while chairs facing each other can increase it. Compare the amount of interaction occurring in a physician’s waiting room, where chairs line a wall, with the amount of interaction occurring in restaurants, where chairs are positioned to encourage conversation. Some rooms say, “Use me,” and actually bring people together, while others say, “Look at me,” and keep people out.

Informal space or non-fixed-feature space is the space we carry around with us. It is invisible, highly mobile, and enlarged or contracted at will as we try to keep individuals at a distance or bring them closer. The amount of personal space we claim, the size of our personal bubble, changes as we move from interaction to interaction, relationship to relationship.

When is it acceptable for another person to invade your territory?

Territoriality: Yours and Mine.

373

Territoriality is another proxemics variable related to our use of informal space. Each of us lays claim to, or identifies as our own, spatial areas that we seek to protect or defend from intrusion. We devise various means to accomplish this, some more formal than others: nameplates, fences, stone walls, assigned chairs, or signs that say things such as “My Room.” While it may not be logical to claim certain spaces, it is typical. Think of how often you have stopped someone from taking a specific seat, saying, “That’s my chair,” or “Don’t sit there—that’s Dad’s seat.”

Problems may develop when another invades territory we have identified as ours. Sometimes we fight over spaces, or we get upset when someone uses space we think is ours without our permission. To restore our comfort and prevent another from continuing to occupy our space, we may chastise a person who, without our authorization, put his or her things on our desk or in our room.

In professional settings, territory claimed tends to reflect status. CEOs and company presidents typically are accorded more favorable and larger office spaces than are managers. The former also are able to employ more markers, such as outer offices with assistants, to keep others out. While higher-status individuals can enter the spaces of lower-status people unannounced, the opposite is rarely true.

Semi-fixed-feature space: Space in which movable objects are used to identify boundaries and promote or inhibit interaction.

Informal space or non-fixed-feature space: The invisible space each person carries around.

Territoriality: The claiming or identifying of space as one’s own.

Haptics: The study of how touch communicates.

HAPTICS: TOUCH In the discussion on proxemics, we noted that intimate space extends from the point of touch to 18 inches. Haptics, or touch, is usually involved in our closest relationships. While always part of sexual communication, touch also plays a role in helping us develop closer relationships and is a key ingredient in the establishment and maintenance of many of our personal relationships.

374

Touch is an element of our closest relationships.

Touching signals the desire for closeness. As children we likely were introduced to various touching no-no’s. For example, we might have been instructed to keep our hands to ourselves around people—and not to touch when around breakable items. However, touch remains an important tool in interpersonal communication, and the messages it communicates, as we shall see, are varied.

The amount of touching we do or find acceptable is, at least in part, culturally conditioned. As with proxemics, a set of norms governs our use of touch. When others violate these norms, we may experience discomfort. Although some cultures promote only limited touching, others promote more frequent touch. Members belonging to a given culture generally conform to its established norms. In the United States, for instance, it is more acceptable for women to touch each other than it is for men to touch each other.30 Touch also correlates positively with openness, comfort with relationships, and the ability to express feelings.31

We use touch for different purposes: to communicate attitude or affect, to encourage affiliation, and to exert control or power.32 To demonstrate our concern for others, we often touch them. In some ways, beginning early in our lives, touch serves a therapeutic function. Infants wither emotionally and physically when not touched, and they thrive when picked up and held. Our entrance into and our exit from this world typically involve touch. Unfortunately, although touch is our most effective means of demonstrating affect or support, and it is important for the maintenance of

375

both physiological and psychological health, as we get older we are often touched less.

Touch also helps us exert status or power in relationships. People of higher status usually initiate touch. Thus, it is more likely you will see the CEO pat a worker on the shoulder than vice versa.33 The person who initiates touch is also the one who usually controls or directs the interaction. The person touching typically is perceived to have more power and to be more assertive than the person he or she is touching. Thus, the touching act itself implies power. Sometimes, however, rather than communicating liking or concern, touch signals dislike, dominance, aggression, or abuse; shoves, pokes, and slaps fall into this category.

The amount of consensual touching two people do indicates how much they like each other. Touch is part of relationship development and is used as a guide to gauge the amount of intimacy desired. We touch those we like and try not to be touched by those we dislike.

Touch also marks greetings and leave-takings. Even a handshake can be social and polite or friendly and warm.

ARTIFACTUAL COMMUNICATION AND APPEARANCE What clothing or jewelry do you like to wear? What do your appearance, hairstyle, and mode of dress and personal adornments suggest to others about you? Do others find your bodily appearance and attire pleasing and appropriate?34 And how does what you wear affect you?

Artifactual communication and appearance influence our reactions. In the early stages of a relationship, what we wear and how we look affect first impressions and may even lead to our being accepted or rejected. In addition, the clothing and jewelry we wear can cause others to form judgments regarding our success, character, power, and competence. Typically, we respond more positively to those we perceive to be well dressed than to those whose attire we find questionable or unacceptable. In the past, Americans were more apt to respond to requests from well- dressed individuals, including those in uniform, than they were to listen to or emulate individuals whose dress suggested lower status or a lack of authority,35 but things may be changing. During the past few presidential campaigns, candidates have dressed more casually in the effort to come off

376

as accessible and as “empathetic, regular Joes.”36

Unfortunately, many believe we live in a looks-based culture. They may be right. It appears that tall men, slender people, and attractive women are awarded a premium for their height, thinness, and beauty. For example, when it comes to height, taller people seem to win elections and jobs. Men actually make almost $800 a year more for every extra inch of height. When it comes to weight, individuals who are obese or overweight are treated more unkindly, with heavier people earning less than slim people or people of average weight. In like fashion, persons others judge to be unattractive receive lower salaries than do persons judged attractive. Attractiveness also appears to be a factor for people facing prison, with less attractive people receiving longer sentences than their more attractive peers.37

What we wear and how we look helps others form impressions of us. What do the artifacts you wear suggest to others about you?

Recent research has also discovered that what we wear affects our

377

cognitive processes, reflecting the findings of a new scientific field called “embodied cognition.” According to a study conducted by Hajo Adam and Adam D. Galinsky, because of this, if you wear a white coat you believe belongs to a physician, your ability to pay attention improves significantly. If, however, you think the same white coat belongs to a painter, no such improvement occurs. Quite simply, the clothing we have on not only influences how others see us but, by transforming our psychological state, also affects how we think about ourselves.38

Are you, for example, familiar with the television hit Mad Men? Acknowledging the show’s popularity, a recent news headline proclaimed “Now You Can Look Like the Drapers.” The story reported on a major national retailer’s decision to introduce a Mad Men line, with clothing and accessories based on the show offered for sale to the public. The hit status of Mad Men made the clothing of the 1960s the style to wear in the second decade of the twenty-first century!39 If you wanted to look like Betty Draper, you might have bought A-line dresses, while Don Draper made the thin tie and fitted jacket into a statement. Some fans even created avatars of themselves dressed as their favorite Mad Men characters, and others adopted the actual hairstyles worn by the characters they most admired. Some used all their nonverbal wiles to capture the essence of the series, even purposefully mimicking the speech cadences and gestures of characters.

The craze for retro fashion tells a story. Back in Mad Men days, clothing echoed gender roles and helped prepare us for the transition from domestic roles for women to roles that were more progressive, as many women of the day forsook meekness, cherishing their new independence.40 The show’s costumers are conscious and deliberative in their use of fashion as nonverbal message.

378

Slick sixties fashions are an important part of the popularity of the television drama Mad Men. The costumes evoke the spirit of the era and communicate the characters’ personalities.

OLFACTICS: SMELL Who smells good to you? How good do you smell to others? Through the years, the desire to use and appeal to the sense of smell or olfactics has spawned numerous industries offering products such as perfumes and colognes, mouthwashes and deodorants, household disinfectants, scented candles, and aromatherapy oils. Unlike the members of some cultures, Americans are into masking their natural bodily odors, preferring to use smell as an attractor by substituting pleasant for unpleasant smells in the effort to trigger emotional reactions, sexual arousal, romance, or friendship. For example, women prefer men who smell similar to them.41 Gay men respond to smell much as women do, and in ways that are distinct from those of heterosexual men.42

Smell and the recall of good and bad memories go hand in hand. When something bad happens, for example, our sense of smell sharpens, as if going on high alert to warn us of impeding danger.43 Of course, we also have good memories related to the presence of pleasing smells, such as freshly baked cookies and flowers blooming.

COLOR: ASSOCIATIONS AND CONNECTIONS Color talks both to and about us. The colors we surround ourselves with

379

and the colors we wear affect us both physically and emotionally. For example, research has found that when a person is exposed to pure red for extended periods, the nervous system is excited, and blood pressure, respiration rate, and heart rate rise. In contrast, when the person is similarly exposed to dark blue, a calming effect occurs, and blood pressure, respiration, and heart rate fall.44 Color may help compel us to move more quickly or slowly, help us relax, or cause us to become agitated. People who regularly wear red tend to be more active, outgoing, and impatient than those who avoid the color.

Olfactics: The study of the sense of smell.

Smell can attract or repel. How do you use smell in your efforts to attract others?

Fast-food chains, product marketers, department stores, and law enforcement agencies use our predictable reactions to various colors as behavioral conditioners. For example, because the color green encourages oral interaction, it is common practice for investigators to question suspects in green rooms, or in rooms where the lighting is green. Of course, green also prompts ecological associations. Table 6.6 indicates how marketers use color to target consumers.45 In which group would you place yourself?

Colors do not evoke the same meanings in all cultures. For example, whereas in the United States and European countries brides routinely wear white, in Asian countries white is the color of mourning and so not considered suitable for weddings. In India, if a bride wears white, at least a

380

touch of another color is usually added. In Ghana blue signifies joy; in Iran it has negative connotations. In the United States yellow suggests caution or cowardice; in China it represents wealth. Korean Buddhists reserve the color red for writing a person’s name upon his or her death. What meanings do different colors have for you?

In their efforts to influence our reactions to color, some paint companies give their colors new names. For example, Sherwin-Williams has a color called Synergy (a shade of green), and Ace Paint has Hey There (a yellowish color)— words that give new meaning to color.46 The names of the colors suggest how they are likely to influence communication.

Color affects us both physically and emotionally. How does the color red affect you?

CHRONEMICS: THE COMMUNICATIVE VALUE OF TIME Chronemics is the study of how we use time to communicate. Some of us are preoccupied with time, while others regularly waste it. Some of us are typically early, while others are chronically late. Some of us approach life with a sense of urgency, while others prefer a more leisurely pace. Some of us are early birds, functioning best in the morning, while others, night owls, perform best at night.

TABLE 6.6 Color Matters

381

SOURCE: Based on Max Luscher, The Luscher Color Test, translated and edited by Ian Scott, New York: Random House, 1969.

Chronemics: The study of how humans use time to communicate.

FIGURE 6.2 How Often Are You Late for Work?

SOURCE: Based on information from CareerBuilder survey of 7,780 workers.

Misunderstandings, miscalculations, and disagreements involving time can create communication and relationship problems. What does it mean to be “on time”? How is the concept of punctuality construed? To be “on time”

382

for a job interview may be interpreted differently from what it means to be “on time” for a cocktail party. The latter usually allows more flexibility.

We also structure time in an effort to ensure we accomplish needed tasks. How long we are willing to wait to meet with someone or for something to occur is also a reflection of our status and the value we place on what we are waiting for. Status affords us greater power to control both our own time and others’ time. The more status a person has, the longer others with less status will wait to see him or her.47

Our culture influences how we use and think about time. In some cultures people live for today, but in others they are waiting for tomorrow. Thus, even the meaning of the phrase “a long time” is influenced by how a culture’s members conceive of time.

Contact cultures: Cultures that encourage nonverbal displays of warmth, closeness, and availability.

Noncontact cultures: Cultures that discourage the use of nonverbal displays of warmth, closeness, and availability.

CULTURE AND NONVERBAL BEHAVIOR

Our culture modifies our use of nonverbal cues. For example, individuals who belong to contact cultures, such as Saudi Arabia, France, and Italy, relish the intimacy of contact; when interacting, they tend to display their warmth, closeness, and availability to one another, tend to be comfortable standing close to each other, seek maximum sensory experience, and touch each other frequently. In contrast, members of noncontact cultures or lower-contact cultures, such as Scandinavia, Germany, England, Japan, and the United States, place more value on privacy and are more likely to discourage the behaviors exhibited by higher-contact culture members.48

REFLECT ON THIS: Does Beauty Pay?

383

Research reveals a connection between perceived attractiveness, mating, and income. In Daniel S. Hamermesh’s book Beauty Pays: Why Attractive People Are More Successful, the accomplished economist explains why he believes attractive people make more money than unattractive people—some $230,000 more over the course of their lives. According to Hamermesh, this is true even in professions where beauty should not be an issue, such as education and sports. Additionally, Hamermesh reports that men suffer more monetarily for being labeled unattractive than do women, with women earning some 3 percent less and men earing a whopping 22 percent less than more attractive cohorts.

Consider these questions:

1. If we know the cost of unattractiveness, should those judged below average on the beauty scale be protected in the same way we protect people from racism and sexism?

2. Have you ever penalized another or been penalized in some way yourself for your looks? Explain.

SOURCES: For example, see Mads Meier Jaeger, “A Thing of Beauty Is a Joy Forever”? Returns to Physical Attractiveness over the Life Course,” Social Forces, 89, 2011, p. 983–1003; and P. Prokop and Peter Fedor, “Physical Attractiveness Influences Reproductive Success of Modern Men,” Journal of Ethology, 29, 2011, p. 453–458.

Daniel S. Hamermesh, Beauty Pays: Why Attractive People Are More Successful, Princeton, Ml: Princeton University Press, 2011.

Individuals who grow up in different cultures may display emotion or express intimacy in different ways. For example, members of Mediterranean cultures tend to display uninhibited, exaggerated highly

384

emotional reactions, expressing grief or happiness with open facial displays, magnified gestures, and vocal cues supportive of their feelings. In contrast, neither the Chinese nor the Japanese readily reveal their feelings in public, preferring to display less emotion, maintain more self- control, and keep their feelings to themselves; for these reasons, they often remain expressionless.49

Even when members of different cultures use the same nonverbal cues, they may not mean the same thing. In the United States, for instance, a nod symbolizes agreement or consent, while in Japan it means only that a message was received.

Misunderstandings become more likely when we fail to understand that persons around the world and from different cocultures use nonverbal cues that adhere to cultural rules that are different from ours. For example, individuals from Latino cultures tend to avoid making direct eye contact with another person as a sign of respect or attentiveness, a cue that persons from the main U.S. culture may misinterpret as a sign of inattentiveness or disrespect.50 Like those from Latino cultures, individuals from Asian cultures also lower their eyes as a means of signaling respect. While African Americans are apt to use more continuous eye contact than European Americans when speaking, they tend to use less when listening.51 They also prefer authority figures to avert their gaze.52 When it comes to public displays of fervent emotion, however, African Americans tend to be comfortable with such behavior, while some members from the mainstream culture may regard such displays as inappropriate because they violate their expectation for self-control and restraint.53 Culture influences other kinds of nonverbal cues as well. For example, while a timepiece may be a great gift to give someone in the United States, in China clocks are associated with death and funerals, so making a gift of a clock may be interpreted as a sinister act.54 And while Americans are prone to spending money to straighten less-than-perfect teeth to improve their smiles, in Japan a new fashion has women paying to have their teeth purposefully made crooked—a look called yaeba, favored by men and suggesting the woman is not perfect. This practice is thought to make the women more girl-like and approachable, sexualizing them in the process. Just as women in the United States use Botox to change their appearance and make themselves more acceptable to men, Japanese women use yaeba to maintain a youthful appearance.55

385

For us to interact effectively with individuals from different cultures, we need to make the effort to identify and understand how culture shapes nonverbal communication. Acknowledging that one communication style is not intrinsically better than any other can help foster more successful multicultural exchanges.

GENDER AND NONVERBAL BEHAVIOR Just as we learn language from others, we pick up the proper use of nonverbal cues from them as well. In fact, our nonverbal interaction style likely contributes to our gendered identity, because the preferred styles of men and women tend to reflect a number of gendered patterns. Researcher Judith Hall suggests that “‘male’ and ‘female’ are roles, each with its set of prescribed behaviors.”56 As a result, men and women commonly use nonverbal communication in ways that reflect societal expectations. For example, men are expected to exhibit assertive behaviors that demonstrate their power and authority; women, in contrast, are expected to exhibit more reactive and responsive behavior. Thus, it should not surprise us that men talk more and interrupt women more frequently than vice versa.57

Men are also more apt to be dominant during interactions. The measurement of visual dominance involves comparing the percentage of time spent looking while speaking with the percentage of time spent looking while listening. When compared with women, men display higher levels of looking while speaking and lower levels of looking when listening. Thus, the visual dominance ratio of men usually is higher than that of women, again reflecting the ability of nonverbal cues to reinforce perceptions of social power.58

Men and women also differ in how they use space and touch. Men tend to use space and touch to assert their dominance over women. As a result, men are much more likely to touch women than women are to touch men. Women thus are more apt to be the recipients of touching actions than they are to be the initiators. Men usually also claim more personal space than do women, and when they walk with women, they are more likely to take a position in front of the women than behind them. Thus, usually, males are the “touchers” and not the “touchees” and are the leaders rather than the followers. In general, when it comes to same-sex touch, it is considered more appropriate for women to touch other women than for men to touch other men. Men, it appears, have more of a concern with being perceived

386

as homosexual than women do.59

True or False 5. Some women purposefully make their teeth crooked. True. The look, called yaeba in Japan, is believed to increase a man’s interest in a woman.

Visual dominance ratio: A figure derived by comparing the percentage of looking while speaking with the percentage of looking while listening.

TRY THIS: The Race Factor 1. Are the nonverbal reactions of a television character influenced by

the race of the other character in a scene? Do the nonverbal reactions displayed by television actors influence racial attitudes in viewers? According to research, the answer to both these questions is yes. The facial expressions and body language of actors are perceived as less favorable when the characters they are interacting with are black. The more negative reactions displayed by the actors adversely affect viewers’ attitudes about race. In contrast, when black characters are responded to more favorably than white characters, the attitudes of viewers toward blacks improve. You are the director of television drama. Given these research findings, what instructions would you give your actors?

2. Is your outfit perceived to be a reflection of your race? Again the answer appears to be yes. Research confirms that people make judgments about race based on cues that extend beyond skin color. For example, people are more frequently perceived to be black if they are wearing janitorial attire than if they are wearing other kinds of clothing. The stereotypes we carry with us influence our

387

perceptions of race. Provide an example of a time when you stereotyped a stranger on the basis of her or his apparel.

SOURCES: Valerie Ross, “Color TV,” Scientific American Mind, July/August 2010, p. 13.

Jonathan B. Freeman, Andrew M. Penner, Aliya Saperstein, Matthias Scheutz, and Nalini Ambady, “Looking the Part: Social Status Cues Shape Race Perception,” PLoS ONE, 6:9, e25107. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025107; also cited in Pamela Paul, “Is Race Reflected by Your Outfit?,” New York Times, October 16, 2011, p. ST6.

One of the nonverbal behaviors that women display more than men is smiling. Accustomed to using a smile as an interactional tool, women even smile when under stress.60 In contrast, men, who are customarily taught to display less emotion than women, are likely to suppress their facial expressions, thereby conveying their sense of reserve and self-control. Gender differences in behaviors such as smiling do not necessarily cross over to cocultures. Unlike their Caucasian counterparts, African American women do not tend to smile more than African American men. Feminine socialization functions differently in the African American community. Women also commonly display their feelings more overtly than do men. In general, women are more expressive and exhibit higher levels of involvement during person-to-person interaction. Women also use nonverbal signals to draw others into conversation to a greater extent, perhaps smiling at them or opening their hands in the direction of others to solicit comments. While women characteristically demonstrate an interest in affiliation, men generally are more interested in establishing the strength of their ideas than in sharing the floor.61 On the other hand, women tend to be better interpreters of nonverbal messages.

When it comes to use of artifacts, use of color, and clothing, men and women are likely to reflect the stereotyped characteristics attributed to the sexes. For instance, women use artifacts such as jewelry, cosmetics, and hair adornments that help reinforce the image of a woman as a decorative object. Similarly, men’s clothing tends to be less colorful and more functional than women’s clothing. Men’s clothing is more likely than women’s to promote utility, activity, and ease of movement, and it does not call the same kind of attention to the body as does women’s clothing. Consequently, women are perceived as more sexual.62

388

Despite these habitual proclivities, in recent years some men have taken to wearing heels and some women have taken to wearing classic male oxfords. In fact, in France, the wearing of high-heeled shoes, by men as well as women, used to be perceived as a sign of nobility.

How would you describe what this man is wearing over his shoulder? Would you change the terminology were a woman wearing it?

Today, they help men bring a look to dance floor clubs. While it appears to be acceptable for women to wear shoe styles that were previously reserved for men, how long do you think it will be before contemporary society finds it acceptable for men to wear stilettos?63 Interestingly, men are also wearing “wristwear” (not called bracelets) and carrying “holdalls” (not referred to as purses and less and less as “murses“).64

Remember, according to standpoint theory (discussed in Chapter 3), it was women’s subordinate societal status that compelled them to become better message decoders so that they could accurately predict the behavior of the more dominant or powerful men.65 On the other hand, as Carol Gilligan notes, since women are more concerned than men with relationship

389

maintenance, it follows that they are likely to develop an enhanced sensitivity to nonverbal cues that facilitate and sustain relationship development.66

NONVERBAL CUES AND FLIRTING: EXPRESSING INTEREST OR DISINTEREST

Flirting is a means of self-promotion as well as a vehicle to express your interest in another. As we now realize, making an impression on someone starts not when you begin to speak, but rather with your appearance, posture, manner of moving, and gestures.

How do males and females signal interest in potential partners? Males signal their interest by preening and stretching (actions that makes them seem larger). They also are likely to stiffen their stance and flex their muscles. Men may also talk in a low voice and are likely to stand or sit with their hands on their belt or belt buckle. Females, in contrast, display nonverbal actions designed to make them appear smaller. They may play with or flick their hair, tilt their heads, exposing their necks, and even display their inner wrists. They also are apt to glance, gaze, primp, preen, pout, lip lick, smile, giggle, laugh, and nod in agreement. Both men and women flash or raise their eyebrows slightly to indicate their interest, make eye contact (even from across the room) or exhibit sideway glances, and play with accessories such as earrings, necklaces, or neckties. They also tend to lean in closer, exhibit open body language, gaze at the other’s lips or jaw, laugh, and lightly touch the other’s arm or knee.67

TRY THIS: Top Billing Fascination with name brands and celebrity culture has transformed the clothing industry. Many people wear clothing like a billboard —using what they have on to promote their personal status, express affection for a celebrity, or endorse an issue or cause. For example, we wear clothing or carry artifacts emblazoned with the logos of popular designers, effectively providing free advertising for those labels. We wear copies of outfits worn by celebrities. We wear T-shirts promoting our attitudes toward an array of subjects, from opposition to animal cruelty to support for a political candidate.

390

1. In your opinion, are men and women more apt to use clothing in this manner?

2. Why do you think this is so?

To slow down or de-escalate a flirtation, the woman may turn her body away, cross her arms across her chest, or avoid meeting the other’s eyes. Both men and women use departing, excuses involving friends, answering or pretending to answer a cell phone, ignoring, and facial expressions of disinterest to deter or end a flirtation. When terminating a flirtation, men tend to be less polite than women. Of course, the consequences of unwanted flirtation can be serious, especially if it is interpreted as sexual harassment or becomes obsessively intrusive.68

Gender influences men’s and women’s use of nonverbal cues as they define their expectations for each other, express their feelings about and toward one another, and convey their interest in pursuing or not pursuing an interpersonal relationship. By sensitizing yourself to the differences associated with gender, you can reduce misunderstandings and increase your personal communication effectiveness.

MEDIA, TECHNOLOGY, AND NONVERBAL MESSAGES

All too often, the media and technology help to legitimate stereotypical nonverbal displays. Their contents depict a plethora of open sexual appeals, portrayals of women obsessed with men, and male-female interactions in which the men are physically dominant and the women are subordinate. They also include numerous repetitions of the message that “thin is in.”

For example, in her video series Killing Us Softly, Jean Kilbourne explores how media representations help convey gender norms for dominance and subordination. Kilbourne argues that advertising, the primary storyteller in our culture, takes agency away from women. According to Kilbourne, by exploiting the social anxieties women have and espousing the American value that transformation is possible, advertisers encourage women to be excessively thin. Kilbourne also warns that the images advertisers use

391

undermine how women see themselves while at the same time participating in the normalization of violence directed at them by men. In support of her position, Kilbourne offers examples of how advertisements sexualize women, turn women into body parts, contain numerous instances of silenced women, depict women competing against one another, trivialize the power women have, appear to condone violence against women, and feature few older women. Kilbourne further observes that advertising’s objectification and sexualization of men is also on the rise.69

After repeated exposure to such media messages, men and women come to believe and ultimately emulate what they see and hear. Thus, females are primed to devote considerable energy to improving their appearance, preserving their youthfulness, and nurturing others, while males learn to display tougher, me, men are typically portrayed as superior to women, who are usually shown in various stages of undress. In the media, nonverbal behaviors portray women as vulnerable and men in control.70

Flirting is a means of self-promotion as well as a means of expressing our interest in another.

392

The repetition of such myths can cause us to feel dissatisfied and inadequate. If we rely on the media for messages about what is and is not desirable in our relationships and interactions, we may find it difficult to be ourselves.

Even mediated vocal cues suggest that it is the male and not the female who is the authority. In up to 90 percent of all advertisements, male voices are used in voice-overs-even when the product being sold is aimed at women. Interestingly, however, when the medium changes and we segue to the computer, we find that computer voices are mostly female, as exemplified by the voice-activated feature called Siri—the iPhone virtual assistant. The reason: research reveals that people find women’s voices more pleasing. This is also the rationale for the use of female voices in most navigation systems—except those sold in Germany, where German men refuse to take directions from a woman.71

The continued growth of the use of computer-generated virtual reality simulations is cause for some concern. While facilitating our feeling as if we are really interacting in different, but make-believe, environments and even giving us the opportunity to change our gender, such simulations are also being used to enforce violent gender scenarios resulting in women being threatened and killed. Even when erotic rather than violent, computer games all too often reinforce the notion that men have physical control over women.

393

When we are interacting online, sometimes words are not enough.

In the effort to help eliminate some of the ambiguity of online communication, individuals use emoticons—relational icons—to increase the expressiveness of their written messages by revealing the user’s physical or emotional state. Additionally, they employ a kind of shorthand, using abbreviations such as ROFL (rolling on the floor laughing) or LOL (laughing out loud), to describe their reactions to a partner. Still, despite advances in virtual reality programs, it is impossible to reach out and actually touch someone on the computer screen.72 The use of emoticons is not without criticism. As one person wrote, “If anybody on Facebook sends me a message with a little smiley-frowny face or a little sunshine with glasses on them, I will de-friend them. I also de-friend for OMG and LOL. They get no second chance. I find it lazy. Are your words not enough?”73

What is more, soon we will no longer merely look like we are talking to ourselves when wearing tiny wireless earpieces connected to our smartphones; we may soon also be able to don “Google glasses”—thick- framed eyeglasses that will project information and entertainment onto the lenses—which may well cause us to exhibit bizarre body language as we seek to avoid the virtual things projected before us.74 Can you imagine

394

how an onlooker will interpret the flailing of your arms? While Google glasses may be the next big thing, right now facial recognition software lets us use only visual cues to tag someone on Facebook.

Emoticons: Text-based representations of facial expressions and moods.

TRY THIS: Can You Read the Cues?

Back in 1959, anthropologist Edward T. Hall coined the expression “the silent language” to describe nonverbal communication. Halls writings on nonverbal communication attracted significant attention, both scholarly and popular. Hall argued that when we fail to decode the manners, gestures, and subtle protocols that accompany words, we leave ourselves vulnerable to miscommunications of one kind or another.

Today we spend significant communicative time interacting online in social networks. It is estimated that high school students alone devote in excess of nine hours a week to social networking. Add texting, blogging, and tweeting on top of that. In our increasingly text-dependent world, more and more communication involves the exchange of written words alone. The prevalence of texting and other forms of messaging leaves a dearth of opportunities to learn to read posture, facial expressions, intonation, and eye movements—all the expressive behaviors of nonverbal communication that are so essential for mutual understanding.

1. In your opinion, are we in danger of losing the “silent fluency” that comes from experiencing face-to-face communication, a needed key in reading another’s behavior? Explain your answer.

2. How do you suggest we ensure that such skills are acquired?

3. To what extent do you believe that using FaceTime and Skype, enablers of face-to-face interaction over cell phones and computers,

395

solve some of these issues? How does reading someone’s face when you are virtually face-to-face with him or her compare with reading faces when you are really face-to-face?

SOURCE: Mark Bauerlein, “Why Gen-Y Johnny Can’t Read Nonverbal Cues,” Wall Street Journal, September 28, 2009, p. W11.

GAINING COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE IN NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION

In Chapter 1, we noted that human beings cannot not communicate, because all behavior has message value. In fact, nonverbal behavior affects credibility ratings. Thus, it is important to learn to use nonverbal messages to enhance your personal credibility, likability, and attractiveness, and, at times, to establish dominance. By using nonverbal cues appropriately, you can create a more favorable impression and aid in the development of your relationships. If we are to enhance our abilities to develop effective interpersonal relationships, we need to be fully aware of the nonverbal messages we send and receive.

PAY ATTENTION TO NONVERBAL MESSAGES By tuning in to nonverbal messages, we can enhance our awareness of how others respond to us. Nonverbal communication is a “relationship language.” It expresses how we feel about one another. Even though it may be a challenge to interpret how people really feel, if only because they may not want us to know, the key to understanding people is to observe them in action and listen to the sound of their voices as they interact with you. For example, when in your company, do other people lean toward you or pull away? Face you directly or indicate a desire to avoid interpersonal involvement by facing away from you? Do their facial expressions suggest they are happy you are around, interested in pursuing a relationship, fearful to approach you, or angry with you? Is their posture relaxed, indicating they feel comfortable, or uptight, indicating that they feel you or the situation pose a threat? What do their voices reveal? Do they speak in a friendly manner? Are they trying to use their voices to hide what they are really feeling? Similarly, what does their use of touch, space, and distance suggest about your relationship? What about their use of clothing, color, and time? As you observe others, you pick up and interpret

396

nonverbal cues that reveal their attitudes and feelings.

WHEN UNCERTAIN ABOUT A NONVERBAL CUE’S MEANING, ASK! What a particular nonverbal cue signifies in one culture may not transfer to another culture. For example, psychologist Aaron Wolfgang reports,

I remember when I was doing some filming in a marketplace in Palermo, a group of men motioned to my crew with their arms extended, palms down and fingers moving back and forth. We thought it meant, “Go away.” As we prepared to leave, one of the men came forward, smiled, and taking our arms invited us for some wine. We found out later that the gesture meant, “Come here.”75

To avoid misinterpretation, it is important to pay attention to differences in cultural background.

Even if you and those with whom you interact come from the same culture, it is important to remember that nonverbal cues can have multiple meanings. Because of the ambiguity of nonverbal cues, it is a good idea to check your perception, perhaps by paraphrasing, to determine if your interpretation is correct. By asking for verbal clarification of your observations, you increase the chances for mutual understanding.

REALIZE INCONSISTENT MESSAGES HAVE COMMUNICATIVE VALUE When words and facial expressions, gestures, postures, or vocal cues contradict each other, rely more on the nonverbal information you are receiving than on the words. Even though the words may be precisely what we want or expect to hear, we must also heed unintended mixed or inconsistent messages to help us decide, for example, whether the other person is incompetent, nervous, or a liar.

MATCH THE DEGREE OF CLOSENESS YOU SEEK WITH THE NONVERBAL BEHAVIOR YOU DISPLAY Nonverbal behavior should be compatible with the kind of relationship sought. Touch, for example, typically varies according to duration, location, and strength, depending on our relationship with another person. Similarly, intimacy and distance also correlate with relationship type.

397

Thus, your proximity to the other person and the amount of touching you use should be compatible with the kind of relationship you seek. The more intimate your relationship is, the closer you will want to be to each other. The less intimate you are with another person, the greater the distance you are likely to keep between you. Should you find yourself in close proximity with someone with whom you are not emotionally close, you can use nonverbal cues to compensate for your discomfort.76 For example, you may decrease eye contact, helping to psychologically increase the distance between you.

Similarly, if you are separated from someone with whom you feel emotionally close, you can find ways to use nonverbal cues to close the distance gap, perhaps increasing eye contact, waving, or smiling. Among the other nonverbal cues you can use that reveal the closeness of a relationship are cues related to chronemics or time. You reveal your closeness to and comfort with another person by spending more time together.

MONITOR YOUR NONVERBAL BEHAVIOR Monitoring your own nonverbal behavior is a critical component of interpersonal goal attainment. By engaging in self-reflection, you will be better able to judge if you are using nonverbal cues to project the message you hope to send. For example, how well do you use facial expressions and body movements to foster relationships you want to pursue and terminate relationships you want to end? Are you effective at using the environment to invite or better control opportunities for person-to-person interaction? What does your proximity to the other person and your use of touch suggest about the nature of your relationship? When you want to change the tenor of a relationship from one that is close to one that is more restrained, or vice versa, what nonverbal cues do you characteristically put into play? How do they affect your partner?

ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ABILITIES TO ENCODE AND DECODE NONVERBAL MESSAGES VARY Some of us are better at regulating, expressing, and interpreting nonverbal behavior than are others. There appears to be a positive correlation between our ability to enact nonverbal messages and our ability to receive and decipher them—skills that also are linked with a Extroverts also have an advantage when it comes to picking up nonverbal cues because they are

398

comfortable in making contact, participating in social encounters, and observing others.

Even more important, the more we hone our nonverbal abilities, the more likely it is that others will perceive us as socially adjusted and that we will be able to exert social influence and have satisfying relationships.77

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Suprised Sam

Sam entered the conference room. He couldn’t put his finger on what was up, but things just didn’t feel right to him as he observed the people already present in the room. At the head of the impressive mahogany table sat his company president. Senior vice presidents sat to the president’s right and left, and several managers—including Sam’s immediate supervisor—lined the table’s sides. There was one seat open. As Sam approached, he couldn’t help but feel uneasy. Sure, the people at the table were drinking coffee, smiling, checking their smartphones, consulting their tablets, texting, and chatting among themselves. As Sam took his seat, not one person looked up or said a word to him. Sam asked himself why he was feeling uncomfortable. Was it because the president had not yet acknowledged Sam’s presence? Was it because no one had greeted him except maybe his immediate supervisor, who Sam thought had acknowledged him with a perfunctory hello by nodding her head? Whatever it was, Sam felt like an outsider. Then the president looked up—and made eye contact directly with Sam. Everyone else stopped whatever he or she was doing and looked Sam’s way too. The president called the meeting to order, explaining that there was but a single agenda item—Sam.

399

Sam’s heart sank. How could he have missed it? Had there been other cues besides the lack of eye contact that he had overlooked? Was this going to be the end of his career? Here they were, he told himself, about to fire him, and he had had no clue that any problem existed before now. At that moment, the president reached under the table and brought out a bottle of champagne. Sam, he announced, was being promoted and would now be senior vice president in charge of his entire division. Slowly, a smile appeared on Sam’s face, and Sam rose to shake hands with all assembled, including his soon-to-be former supervisor.

Answer these questions:

1. Have there been times when you have felt just as uncomfortable as Sam did on entering a room but could not identify what caused you to feel that way?

2. What steps can we take to ensure that we pick up and do not misread nonverbal cues?

REVIEW THIS CHAPTER SUMMARY

1 Define nonverbal communication, explain its metacommunicative nature, and discuss its functions and characteristics. Nonverbal communication consists of the actions or attributes of human beings, together with the use of objects, sounds, time, and space that have socially shared significance and stimulate meaning in others. Because nonverbal communication helps clarify the nature and meaning of verbal messages, it also fulfills metacommunicative functions. Nonverbal cues can add to, negate, accent, regulate, or replace verbal messages. As such, they are an integral part of the total communication package. Nonverbal behavior also has message value, is ambiguous, is predominantly relational in nature, and provides clues to deception.

2 Define and distinguish among the following kinds of nonverbal

400

messages: kinesics, paralanguage, proxemics, haptics, artifactual communication and appearance, olfactics, color, and chronemics. Kinesics is the study of body motion, including expressions, gestures, eye movement, posture, and rate of walk. Paralinguistics includes a consideration of vocal cues, such as how words are spoken and the impact of vocal variations. Proxemics is the use of space and distance. Haptics includes an exploration of different kinds of touch. Artifactual communication and appearance involve the significance of clothing, personal adornments, beauty, height, and weight for our feelings and others’ reactions to us. Olfactics is the study of the sense of smell. Color has effects on us both psychologically and physically. Chronemics explores the communicative value of time.

3 Compare and contrast the nonverbal communication styles of men and women. Most men and women use nonverbal communication in ways that reflect societal expectations for persons of their respective genders. Thus, men exhibit assertive behaviors and women are more responsive and reactive.

4 Distinguish between contact and noncontact cultures. Contact cultures value the intimacy of contact by promoting interaction and displays of warmth, closeness, and availability. Noncontact cultures value privacy and the maintenance of distance.

5 Describe the impacts of media and technology on nonverbal messages. Media and technology frequently participate in the legitimation of stereotypes. When interacting online, some individuals use emoticons to try to replace the nonverbal cues that would be present in face-to-face interaction.

6 Identify steps you can take to improve your nonverbal effectiveness. By paying attention to nonverbal cues, paying attention to cultural differences, being alert for inconsistent messages, matching nonverbal behavior and relationships so they are compatible, monitoring our nonverbal behavior, and recognizing that we vary in our abilities to encode and decode nonverbal messages, we improve the likelihood of communicating effectively.

401

CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING

1 Can you offer an example of metacommunication in action? How, for example, might you use it to better understand the nature of a relationship? (See pages 152–154.)

2 Can you create a scenario illustrating the role nonverbal cues play in creating a false impression? Why do you think people believe that it is easier to lie with words than with nonverbal cues? (See pages 155– 158.)

3 Can you explain the kinds of messages conveyed by personal appearance? What about those that voice and use of space and distance communicate? (See pages 172–174.)

4 Can you offer two examples of nonverbal messages in action, one demonstrating how gender or culture influences the use and interpretation of nonverbal cues, and the other demonstrating the role that media and technology play in nonverbal messaging? (See pages 175–182.)

5 What can you do to enhance your ability to send and receive nonverbal messages? (See pages 182–184.)

CHECK YOUR SKILLS

1 Can you use nonverbal cues to identify when someone is attempting to deceive you? (See pages 155–157; and Try This, page 158.)

2 Can the ability to read faces accurately improve your relationships? (See pages 159–162; Analyze This, page 162; and Try This, page 182.)

3 Can you use your eyes to increase your visual dominance and establish behavior synchrony? (See pages 161–162.)

402

4 Can correctly interpreting another’s body messages help you make judgments regarding that person’s liking, assertiveness, and power? (See pages 163–165; and Try This, page 164.)

5 Can you use paralinguistic cues to help identify the meaning inherent in spoken words? (See pages 165–167, and Reflect on This, page 167.)

6 Can you use space and distance to clarify intentions? (See pages 167– 170.)

7 Can you recognize the attractiveness effect? (See pages 172–173; and Reflect on This, page 176.)

8 Can you use nonverbal messages to help bridge culture and gender differences? (See pages 175–179; and Try This, page 178.)

9 Can you assess when media and technology are helping to legitimate the use of stereotypical nonverbal displays? (See pages 181–183.)

10 Can you account for the misreading of nonverbal cues? (See pages 182–184; and The Case of Surprised Sam, page 185.)

KEY TERMS

Nonverbal communication 152

Metacommunicative functions 152

Double message 153

Interpersonal deception theory 157

Facial Action Coding System 157

Kinesics 159

Representational facial expressions 161

Presentational facial expressions 162

Microfacial/micromomentary expressions 162

Emblems 163

Illustrators 163

403

Regulators 163

Affect displays 164

Adaptors 164

Paralanguage 165

Articulation 166

Pronunciation 167

Nonfluencies 167

Proxemics 168

Intimate distance 168

Personal distance 168

Social distance 169

Public distance 169

Expectancy violation theory 169

Fixed-feature space 169

Semi-fixed-feature space 170

Informal space or non-fixed-feature space 170

Territoriality 170

Haptics 170

Olfactics 173

Chronemics 174

Contact culture 175

Noncontact culture 175

Visual dominance 177

Emoticons 181

STUDENT STUDY SITE

Visit the student study site at www.sagepub.com/gambleic to access the following materials:

404

• SAGE Journal Articles

• Videos

• Web Resources

• eFlashcards

• Web Quizzes

• Study Questions

405

7Chapter

“I truly believe that life is a contact sport. You never know just who you’ll meet and what role they might play in your career or your life.”

—Robert Morley (1908–1992), actor

CONVERSATIONS LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this chapter, you should be able to demonstrate mastery of the following learning outcomes:

406

1. Define small talk, conversation, and conversational turn taking and enumerate the skills shared by good conversationalists.

2. Identify the five parts of a conversation.

3. Describe how cultural and gender differences ans of popular television shows love to connect with happen just during the commercials.

4. Discuss how media and technology are helping to reinforce or change both the substance and the nature and of conversation.

5. Identify specific steps you can take to improve your conversational skills.

Have you ever found yourself tongue-tied at a party, afraid you would say something stupid?

ans of popular television shows love to connect with one another to engage in conversation and analysis both during and after the airing of every episode. They relish conversing about and deconstructing their favorite programs together—often using Facebook posts,

tweets, and the opportunities provided by call-in aftershows such as Talking Dead, a follow-up program devoted to discussion of The Walking Dead. Apps such as IntoNow and Miso similarly encourage social discussion via online chatter. Years ago, prior to widespread use of the Internet and particularly the advent of social media, popular programs were the topics of workplace “watercooler conversations” on the mornings after new episodes aired, but now viewers can converse with many others about their favorite shows even while watching the shows. Each new online chat venue functions as a substitute for those conversations that in the past would have been held around the proverbial office watercooler.1

Posting comments about television programs on Twitter, Facebook, and other social platforms grew 146 percent from April 2011 to April 2012.2 And the tweeting does not It happens whenever one another to engage in conversation and analysis there is an OMG (Oh my God) moment in a show. The both during and after the airing of every episode. shows most discussed online are those that air live—American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, and The Voice, as well as sports and award shows. Scripted series, however, also generate their fair share of online conversation. Fans thrive

407

on sharing reactions—viewing has been turned into a social experience.

While many of us talk online about and television shows or other subjects simply because we enjoy doing so—treating such discussion as an add-on to the chatting and particularly the advent of social we do face-to-face— others, because of stupid? media, popular programs were the topics social anxiety, prefer connecting online to of workplace “watercooler conversations” interacting face-to-face all the time.3

Consider this: Have you ever found yourself tonguetied at a party, afraid you would say something stupid? According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, this is a pretty common occurrence. Many of us find conversing or speaking up in the presence of others hard to do, especially if we think our social status is in question.4 When we compare ourselves to others and judge ourselves to fall short, we may be struck silent and clam up.

WHAT DO YOU KNOW?

Before continuing your reading of this chapter, which of the following five statements do you believe to be true and which do you believe to be false?

1. Rules guide conversation. TF

2. A skilled conversationalist can control aconversation’s direction. T F

3. Conversations are essentially the same everywhere inthe world. T F

4. Once you have said something wrong in aconversation, you can never repair the damage. T F

5. Texting is taking the place of face-to-face T

408

5. conversations. F

Read the chapter to discover if you’re right or if you’ve made any erroneous assumptions.

ANSWERS: 1. T; 2. T; 3. T; 4. F; 5. F

While making small talk or engaging in spontaneous conversation with another person may come naturally to some of us, for others it poses problems. Yet it is by talking to others that we lay the foundation for most of our interpersonal relationships. Because most people enjoy being in the company of a good communicator, one of the most important skills you can master is that of carrying on an effective conversation. A good conversationalist is adept at approaching others, starting a conversation, listening, changing a topic to one of interest or importance to him or her, and gracefully ending the interaction.

THE IMPORTANCE OF CONVERSATIONAL CONTACT

Conversation facilitates the establishing of interpersonal relationships. As such, it plays a critical role in our lives. For example, some years ago, in an effort to reduce the likelihood that prison inmates would share information about how to commit different crimes, prison reformers reduced the amount of conversation inmates were able to have with each other. The result was very interesting: “The prisoners spent much of their time tapping out coded messages on walls and pipes, devising means of passing information to one another, and working out other clever ways of communicating.” 5 Even when the inmates were denied opportunities to be face-to-face, they found other ways to converse. So have we—when not face-to-face, we connect to converse, primarily by texting.

Retired Navy captain Gerald Coffee, one of hundreds of American pilots shot down over North Vietnam and held as a prisoner of war in a facility known as the “Hanoi Hilton” during the Vietnam War, offers a moving example that illustrates the lengths human beings will go to in order to compensate for face-to-face conversation deprivation. In his book

409

prisoners used to communication with one another within the prison walls. The prisoner who previously had occupied the small cell that was now Coffee’s had scratched a five-by-five grid into the wall. The grid, as illustrated below, displayed a system for using taps to represent the letters of the alphabet; users could indicate letters by tapping, giving the locations down and then across.

Personal relationships depend conversation. When deprived of opportunities to converse face-to-face, we devise other means.

Small talk: Spontaneous conversation that lays the foundation for an interpersonal relationship.

Conversation deprivation: A lack of aural communication.

After learning this system, prisoners were able to maintain contact with one another by covertly tapping coded messages.6 “Hi,” for example, would be tapped as follows:

XX XXX XX XXXX

(2–2) (2–2)

410

H I

TRY THIS: Do You Like to Talk? Assess how you feel about striking up a conversation with another person. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 represents an extremely negative response and 5 represents an extremely positive response, answer each question below as honestly as possible.

1. How much do you enjoy yourself in situations that compel you to mingle and strike up conversations with people you don’t know well or at all?

2. How much do you enjoy engaging in small talk? 3. Do you look forward to spending a lot of time talking with others? 4. How comfortable are you around people who don’t talk a lot? 5. How at ease are you sharing personal information with others when

face-to-face?

What do your answers suggest regarding whether or not you are conversationally apprehensive?

Because of the grid, the prisoners were able to compensate for a lack of aural communication and thereby maintain their sense of connection to others. Try using the “Hanoi Hilton” grid to tap out some words. How important would such a system be for you were it the only means you had to carry on a conversation?

True or False 1. Rules guide conversation.

411

1. Rules guide conversation. True. The rules of conversation reflect accepted social practices.

Conversation: A relatively informal social interaction in which the roles of speaker and listener are exchanged in a nonautomatic fashion under the collaborative management of all parties.

Conversational rules: Behaviors that are established, preferred, or prohibited during social exchanges. Behaviors that are established, preferred, or prohibited during social exchanges.

While connection and conversation are mainstays of human interaction, if unchecked, the extremely extroverted may equate any conversational opening with a rush to speak and a desire to put oneself out there, rather than thinking reflectively before speaking, a quality introverts, who may find nonstop socializing stressful, are more apt to display.7 Thus, being comfortable in the spotlight is not the sole requisite for being an effective conversationalist; another important element is a desire to share real-life experiences.8

WHAT IS CONVERSATION?

Conversation is defined as a relatively informal social interaction in which the parties involved exchange the roles of sender and hearer, or receiver, collaboratively and spontaneously.9 During conversations there is no set time limit for each party to speak or listen; the participants determine the time frame themselves. However, describing conversational exchanges as spontaneous does not mean that conversations are random or without rules. In fact, conversational rules reveal the behaviors we prefer and would like to prohibit in various social situations.10 For instance, if someone says, “Hello,” how do you respond? Typically, with a “Hi,” or a “Hello, how are you?” Rules guide much of person-to-person behavior. Reflect for a moment on the rules you use to guide you in answering the following questions: Do American fathers kiss their sons on the lips? When you are angry with your employer, how do you speak to him or her? We tend to rely on learned social and conversational rules to guide us as we interact.

412

about verbal and nonverbal messages directly to our daily interactions and our efforts at relationship building. After all, as relationship expert and researcher Steve Duck notes, “If you were to sit and list the things that you do with friends, one of the top items on the list would surely have to be ‘talking.’”11 By exploring the dynamics of conversational exchange, we can enhance our ability to engage in everyday talk wherever our conversations occur—whether on the playing field, at work, at home, during a date, or at a social gathering. While many of our conversations are primarily spontaneous, casual interactions with others that involve no preplanned agenda, others are more pragmatic and involve a specific goal on the part of at least one of the conversational parties. Which kinds of conversations do you engage in more?

TRY THIS: The Elevator What rules do most people follow regarding conversing with others in elevators?

1. While in an elevator (in an office building or apartment complex), break a rule you usually follow and observe how the other person reacts. For example, does he or she respond in kind, refrain from responding, or exhibit some other noteworthy behavior?

2. Why do you imagine such elevator rules exist?

True or False 2. A skilled conversationalist can control a conversation’s direction. True. Skilled conversationalists effectively regulate interaction by

413

managing turn taking and topic shifts.

Conversational structure: The typical format for conversation, comprising the greeting, topic priming, the heart of the conversation, preliminary processing, and the closing.

CONVERSATION: GAMES AND PLAYERS Some theorists suggest that conversation is a kind of game and that we can therefore apply the same rules we use when playing a game or a favorite sport to our conversational interactions.12 Adopting this approach, Robert Nofsinger, a communication researcher who studies conversation, notes, “The idea is to apply what we know about ordinary, everyday games (chess, checkers, tic-tac-toe, card games, competitive sports, and so on) to the conduct of conversation.”13 When we use this analogy, we find people making moves, taking turns, and aiming to achieve some goal. We also find them using specific tactics, employing strategies, and devising game plans.

According to Nofsinger, talk produces the moves of conversation. When we talk, however, we do not simply say something, we also do something. Our talk, for example, may direct others, invite others to approach us, signal our acceptance or rejection of another, or insult another. How we act and respond or subsequently conduct our conversations depends on our understanding or interpretation of conversational events.

While the rules of board games and sports games are codified and written down so that they may be enforced easily—and violators can be corrected or penalized for breaking the rules—rules of everyday conversation do not usually appear in print. There are topics we may consider taboo when we interact with some people but that we consider acceptable when we converse with others. We simply are able to change the rules to guide our conversations from day to day and from minute to minute.

CONVERSATIONAL STRUCTURE Most conversations adhere to a general five-stage conversational structure: the greeting, topic priming, the heart of the conversation, preliminary processing, and the closing (see Table 7.1). We address each stage in turn in the following.

414

in the following.

TRY THIS: Conversational Analysis Watch and record a brief segment of a film or TV show focusing on interpersonal relationships in which two characters converse. For example, you might use an excerpt from Modern Family, How I Met Your Mother, Jersey Shore, The Simpsons, or a soap opera. Then analyze the recorded conversation as follows:

1. Describe the nature, purpose, and results of the conversation. 2. Describe how the communicators regulate their interaction, ebb and

flow. Be sure to note how turn taking is managed, who asks questions, who interrupts, and who shifts topics.

3. Discuss the degree to which the characters conversing appear to be involved in the conversation. Identify the cues you have relied on to distinguish involved from uninvolved characters.

4. For both parties to the conversation, evaluate their conversational partner that emotions are shared and conversational adaptability (flexibility), responsiveness (the extent to which they appear to know what to say, understand their role, and feel part of the interaction), perceptiveness (the extent to which they demonstrate an awareness of how the other perceives them and responds to them), and attentiveness (the extent to which they listen carefully to the other party or are preoccupied with personal thoughts).

5. Evaluate whether any party to the conversation displays conversational narcissism—that is, exhibits cues suggesting that a participant is overly self-concerned—and how the presence or absence of this quality affects the outcome of the interaction.

6. Identify which conversational participant exhibits more empathy— that is, which is best able to show his or her conversational partner that emotions are shared and the situation is understood.

7. Evaluate whether the goals of the conversation are achieved and at what, if any, cost.

TABLE 7.1 The Stages of a Conversation

Stage Functions

415

or Tell something about yourself. or Deliver a compliment. or

Make a cute/flippant statement. or Say something innocuous. or Issue a direct invitation.

Topic priming Provide feedforward by previewing the nature of and reason for the conversation. and Ask one or more open-ended questions.

Heart of the conversation

Introduce and then discuss the conversation’s focus or goal by exchanging comments.

Preliminary processing

Reflect back on the conversation in an effort to evaluate conversational progress.

Closing Let the other person know the conversation is ending. Express appreciation. Summarize topics discussed.

The Greeting. Phatic communication is a message that opens up the communication channel, thereby enabling two people to begin interacting. By creating an opening for conversation, the greeting serves that function. The interpersonal greeting is our routine way of beginning or initiating conversation with someone, and we usually are able to adjust it based on our perception of a relationship with a specific person, our mood, and how we imagine the other person will respond. We cannot, however, script our opening lines in advance. There are no lines guaranteed to establish a relationship. “Didn’t I meet you in Istanbul?” and “Do you have an aspirin?” and “Bet I can make you laugh” have all been tried, and they have worked in some instances but not others. Even our favorite line to use at a business function—“You look like someone I Greetings are

416

conversational openers. should know. My name is …”—doesn’t come complete with a guarantee.

Greetings are conversational openers.

Conversational analyst Thomas E. Murray has identified three different categories of conversational openers:

1. Questions (“How are you?”) 2. Advertisements (“My name is …”)

3. Compliments (“I like your suit”)14

Researcher Chris Kleinke also identifies three types of openers:

1. Cute/flippant (“Is that really your hair?”) 2. Innocuous (“What do you think of the band?”) 3. Direct (“Since we’re both eating alone, would you like to join

me?”)15

Note that each of these approaches relies on a question. While men and women both use indirect opening lines, women particularly tend to dislike the use of cute and flippant openers by men.

Whatever type of greeting we employ, we use it to let others know that we are accessible and would like to converse. Normally the person we greet will return our greeting in a similar way. When this does not happen— when the other person responds coolly or with caution to our greeting or

417

when the other person responds coolly or with caution to our greeting or conversational overture—we can usually tell that something is wrong, that the other person does not want to establish contact, that he or she is shy or fears establishing contact, and that we will have to work harder and be more creative if we hope for a more sustained conversation.

Topic Priming. We prime a conversation by keeping the communication channels between us open and by previewing for the other person what the topic or focus of our conversation will be. For example, we might say, “I need your input. What do you think of X?” or “I need to share some bad news with you,” or “This isn’t easy for me to say, and you may not like to hear it, but …” Priming prepares the person we are conversing with for what is to follow.

If we are unable to find a topic to discuss with another person, our conversation ends after the greeting. In general, we usually end up talking about one of three kinds of topics: ourselves, the other person, or a particular situation. Sometimes we test a particular topic, not by merely making a statement but by asking a question: “I liked what you said today at lunch. What do you think businesses should be doing to avoid having to downsize their operations?” or “I’ve been looking for a place to buy a new tablet. I noticed you have one. Do you have any suggestions?” or “I see you’re reading a book by Stieg Larsson. What do you think of his trilogy?” By asking open-ended questions, which allow the respondent free rein in answering, rather than closed-ended questions, which force the respondent to choose a specific response, we are better able to involve and interest another person in conversing with us.

Gregory Stock, author of The Book of Questions, notes that far too frequently we exchange small talk without becoming involved in deeper conversation. To combat this dilemma, he suggests that we ask questions that are more “dangerous,” that perhaps we have never been willing to ask before, and that might provoke more interesting reactions in others. The following are examples of such questions, as suggested by Stock:

418

At the heart of every conversation is its focus or goal.

• For a person you loved deeply, would you be willing to move to a distant country, knowing there would be little chance of seeing your friends or family again?

• Would you accept $1,000,000 to leave the country and never set foot in it again?

• What would constitute a “perfect” evening for you?16

We err in conversation when we cut short the priming stage or extend it beyond what is considered appropriate. If we get stuck in the priming stage, our conversational partner may wonder if we really have anything to discuss—that is, if we have a purpose or focus or are totally disorganized. On the other hand, if we omit this stage and head straight for our goal, the other person may judge us to be rude, insensitive, or interpersonally deficient.

The Heart of the Conversation. At the heart of our conversation, we find its focus or goal. Perhaps we want to share new information with another person. Or perhaps we want to persuade him or her to act or think in a specific way. Maybe we want to offer the person our help—perhaps even just a friendly ear. Whatever our specific goal, in this part of our conversation we get to the heart of the matter—why we opened the conversation in the first place, and why we did our best to prepare the other person for what was to come next.

419

How good we are at getting to and explaining the heart of our conversation is directly related to conversational maintenance skills, which will be discussed a little later in this chapter. The substance of the conversation involves conversational partners exchanging speaker and listener roles.

Open-ended question: A question that allows the respondent free rein in answering.

Closed-ended question: A question that forces the respondent to choose a specific response.

Conversational maintenance: Preservation of the smooth and natural flow of conversation.

Preliminary Processing. The preliminary processing stage is the flip side of topic priming. Here, instead of preparing the other person for what is to come, we process what has just occurred between us. We consider the effects that our conversation has had on each of us and, based on our assessment of the other person’s response, we may decide to adjust or alter our message and strengthen or modify our content. During this stage we may also assess how much we have learned about the other in an effort to determine the extent to which we have been able to reduce our uncertainty about him or her.

As we review our conversation’s progress, we may realize that while we feel that we have accomplished our conversational purpose, our partner may not agree. Thus, we may need to take a step back instead of forward and complete our discussion.

The Closing. The closing is the reverse of the greeting. We now take our leave, say goodbye, signal that we are no longer accessible, and separate ourselves from the other person, sometimes briefly and sometimes forever. How we take our leave often lets the other person know whether we intend to meet with him or her again. “It was good to catch up about you and Joe, but I’ve got to go now, or I’ll be late for my appointment” or “I really enjoyed hearing about your trip. When can I see you again?” or “I’m sorry to hear you haven’t been feeling well. I’ll call you tomorrow to see how you’re doing”—each kind of closing sends a message that is very different from a mere good-bye.

Renowned communication scholar Mark Knapp and his colleagues note that a good closing to a successful conversation serves three functions:

420

1. It lets the other party know that the conversation is nearing an end and thus signals the impending inaccessibility of one party.

2. It is supportive in tone and contains expressions of appreciation for the conversation and the desire to renew contact.

3. It summarizes the main topics discussed.17

Closings based on these three rules leave both parties feeling good about the possibilities for continued contact.

Sometimes we merge conversational stages—the processing and closing stages may be combined, for example—or we may mutually agree to skip a stage because the time we have together is short. Thus, our five-stage model of conversation is just that—a model—a representation of how a conversation forms, builds, and concludes. Not all conversations contain all five steps. However, if you listen and observe carefully, you should be able to identify at least some, if not all, of these stages during many of your conversations. You will probably realize that the conversations you find most fulfilling and least frustrating are those that develop sequentially according to the five-stage model.

CONVERSATIONAL MANAGEMENT

When a conversation flows smoothly and naturally, the roles of speaker and listener are performed simultaneously by both parties, with each party engaging in conversational turn taking—the alternating of speaking and listening during conversation as each takes a speaking turn, cooperating and engaging in dialogue to fulfill the conversation’s purpose.

Conversational turn taking: The simultaneous exchanging of the speaker and listener roles during a conversation.

How does one get a turn to speak during a conversation? Is this something that we can can determine ahead of time? Do perceptions of wealth or status play a role? What behaviors promote conversational dialogue?

TURN TAKING: MAINTAINING AND YIELDING THE FLOOR We regulate our conversations by using and responding to turn- maintaining and turn-yielding signals. Turn-maintaining signals include both paralinguistic and kinesic cues. For example, we may vocalize pauses

421

(ummm, uhhh) to indicate we have not yet completed a thought, inhale a breath to suggest we have more to say, exhibit a gesture that suggests we are not yet finished, or avoid making direct eye contact with the other party until we are fully ready to surrender our speaking turn.

Turn-yielding signals let our conversational partner know that we are prepared to let him or her speak. For example, we may make direct eye contact, ask a question requiring a response, nod in the other person’s direction, drop our pitch, or remain silent. When someone interrupts or overlaps what we consider to be our turn, we may become upset or agitated, fight to maintain our turn allocation, or reluctantly yield it prematurely.

Turn-taking control does not rest in the hands of one person. An individual who is listening may also exert regulatory control over conversational turn taking by emitting turn-requesting signals or turn-denying signals that let the person speaking know whether the listener would like to switch roles. To signal interest in having a speaking turn, the listener might use a vocalized filler such as umm or ah, merely open his or her mouth as if to interject a thought, lean forward and look directly at the speaker, or gesture for attention with his or her hand. Similarly, the listener may signal a reluctance to take over the speaking role by avoiding eye contact with the speaker, shaking his or head to indicate that he or she has nothing to add, engaging in some activity that is incompatible with a speaking role (such as taking copious notes), closing his or her eyes, coughing, or exhibiting a gesture that encourages the speaker not to yield the floor but to continue speaking instead. The use or absence of backchannel signals, or verbalizations we use to tell another person that we are listening, also contributes to the continuing or ending of talk.

Turn-maintaining signals: Paralinguistic and kinesic cues that suggest that a speaker is not yet ready to give up the speaking role.

Turn-yielding signals: Paralinguistic and kinesic cues that indicate the readiness of a speaker to exchange the role of speaker for the role of listener.

Turn-requesting signals: Paralinguistic and kinesic cues that let a speaker know that a listener would like to switch roles. Turn-denying signals: Paralinguistic and kinesic cues that signal a reluctance to switch speaking and/or listening roles.

422

Backchannel signals: Verbalizations one uses to tell another person that one is listening.

Quality maxim: The premise that persons engaged in conversation do not offer comments known to be false.

Quantity maxim: The premise that persons conversing provide as much information as is needed to communicate a message’s meaning and continue the conversation. Relevancy maxim: The premise that persons engaged in conversation do not purposefully go off on tangents or digress.

THE COOPERATION PRINCIPLE For both parties to be satisfied with a conversation, they need to cooperate. According to the cooperation principle, conversations are most satisfying when the comments of the conversational partners are consistent with the conversation’s purpose. Based on this premise, researchers offer the following conversational maxims: quality, quantity, relevancy, and manner.18

According to the quality maxim, persons engaged in conversation should not offer a comment if they know it to be false. The parties to a conversation should offer only information they know is truthful. Information that is deceptive, deliberately misleading, or distorted has no place in conversation. Offering an opinion when you have no knowledge of the topic or are only speculating is inappropriate. Violating this maxim leads to distrust.

The quantity maxim tells us to provide as much information as is needed to communicate the meaning of our message and continue the conversation. This means neither party talks too much or too little. Each should avoid single-word responses but say what is needed to deliver the message while allowing the other person to continue the conversation. Persons who fail to provide others with the information they need violate this maxim. Monopolizing the conversation and failing to give another his or her chance to speak undermines cooperation.

The relevancy maxim asks that we not go off on tangents or purposefully digress and switch subjects when the other party still wants to actively discuss our initial topic. Interjecting irrelevant comments illustrates uncooperativeness. Effective conversationalists work instead to sustain conversational coherence by relating their comments to previous remarks

423

and by rarely interrupting to switch subjects.19 They prefer to ask relevant questions that others enjoy answering.

TRY THIS: Whose Turn Is It, Anyway? Keep a log of all the significant conversations you are involved in for one day. Every time you converse with another person, note the following:

1. The person you conversed with 2. How the conversation was initiated and terminated 3. The topic of conversation 4. The cues you used to determine when it was your turn to talk 5. Your ratings of the extent to which the conversation satisfied both

you and the other person, where represents completely dissatisfied and 5 represents completely satisfied

6. Your reasons for each rating

Finally, recall the last time you missed a turn to speak either because you failed to exert your right to have one or because the other person failed to request your participation or input. With whom do you find it most challenging to get a word in edgewise? What does this person do that makes requesting a turn frustrating? What means do you typically find yourself using in the effort to “get the floor” from another?

True or False 3. Conversations are essentially the same everywhere in the world.

424

False. Culture influences conversation.

Manner maxim: The premise that when conversing one should use diction that is appropriate to the receiver and the interaction’s context.

Monologue: A communication process lacking in interactivity, during which one person speaks while another person listens.

Dialogue: An interactive process involving speaking and listening.

According to the manner maxim, diction should be appropriate to the receiver and the interaction’s context; that means using terms the other party understands and providing background information to avoid confusion. Conversation is informal, but that does not mean it should be disorganized. Adherence to this maxim requires organizing thoughts to facilitate sharing meaning.

These four maxims apply to conversations occurring between persons living in the United States. Person from other cultures may adhere to other maxims, such as the maxim of face-saving, which would require the parties to a conversation to avoid arguing with, contradicting, embarrassing, or correcting one another. In addition, the maxim of politeness might require that persons avoid self-praise or taking credit for an accomplishment, focusing the spotlight on the other instead.20 While it is particularly common for persons from Asian cultures as well as the British to adhere to the foregoing two maxims, people from all cultures value face-saving and politeness.21 Being impolite or committing a face-threatening act (an FTA) would likely jeopardize any relationship.

THE DIALOGUE PRINCIPLE When conversing with another person, we often display a preference for monologue, in which we speak while the other person listens, or , in which we both speak and listen. Unlike dialogue, monologue involves little, if any, conversational ebb and flow, lacks interactivity, and expresses minimal concern for the thoughts and feelings of the other person. Instead, the monologist is self-centered, spends a lot of time talking about him- or herself (this is especially apparent on social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter), and exhibits an obsession with achieving personal conversational goals and objectives. Approximately 40 percent of our everyday talk is devoted to letting others know our thoughts and

425

feelings.22 Why do we find it so enjoyable to talk about ourselves? Harvard University neuroscientists have suggested that self-disclosure becomes its own reward, triggering the same sensations in the brain as food and money.23 What is more, we would rather talk about ourselves even when we are promised an incentive of food or money for speculating about other people.24 What we love is for other people to listen to us.

ANALYZE THIS: The Deceptiveness of Appearance

Read the following excerpt from Lorraine Hansberry’s play A Raisin in the Sun, paying special attention to the nature of turn taking and the state of conversational cooperation exhibited:

Mama: (Still quietly) Walter, what is the matter with you?

Walter: Matter with? Ain’t nothing the matter with me!

Mama:

Yes there is. Something eating you up like a crazy man. Something more than me not giving you this money. The past few years I been watching it happen you. You get all nervous acting and kind of wild in the eyes—(Walter jumps up impatiently at her words) I said sit there now, I’m talking to you!

Walter: Mama—I don’t need no nagging at me today.

Mama:

426

with that. Ruth’s a good, patient girl in her way—but you getting to be too much. Boy, don’t make the mistake of driving that girl away from you.

Walter: Mama—I don’t need no nagging at me today.

Mama:

Seem like you getting to a place where you always tied up in some kind of knot about something. But if anybody ask you ’bout it you just yell at ’em and bust out the house and go out and drink somewheres. Walter Lee, people can’t live with that. Ruth’s a good, patient girl in her way—but you getting to be too much. Boy, don’t make the mistake of driving that girl away from you.

Walter: Why—what she do for me?

Mama: She loves you.

Walter: Mama—I’m going out. I want to go off somewhere and beby myself for a while.

Mama: I’m sorry ’bout your liquor store, son. It just wasn’t thething for us to do. That’s what I want to tell you about—

Walter: I got to go out, Mama—

(He rises.)

Mama: It’s dangerous, son.

Walter: What’s dangerous?

MAMA: When a man goes outside his home to look for peace.

As you reflect on what you have read, consider this question: What do the turn taking and yielding behaviors of Mama and Walter tell us about their relationship? Do they adhere to the cooperation principle?

SOURCE: From A RAISIN IN THE SUN by Lorraine Hansberry, copyright © 1958 by Robert Nemiroff, as an unpublished work. Copyright © 1959, 1966, 1984 by Robert Nemiroff. Copyright renewed 1986, 1987 by Robert Nemiroff. Used by permission of Random House, Inc. Any third party use of this material, outside of this publication, is prohibited. Interested parties must apply directly to Random House, Inc. for permission.

427

Effective communication, however, is dialogic and requires that communicators exhibit concern for each other and their relationship. The conversational parties display respect for each other, invite each other to participate actively in the conversation, display an accepting manner, request clarification of the other person’s perspective, and show empathy by adopting an other-oriented perspective that helps the other person feel understood.

REPAIRING CONVERSATIONAL DAMAGE

Every now and then we commit or are on the receiving end of a conversational blunder—a faux pas—during which something we find objectionable is said. When this occurs, a prime means of repairing the damage done by the blunder is to offer an excuse or a disclaimer designed to lessen the potential negative consequences of the remark. For instance, after insulting a friend or being overly critical of a peer, we might offer an excuse such as “I’m really sorry. It’s been a long day, and my exhaustion got the better of me” or “I don’t know why I said that. Can you forgive me? I’m just stressed because of what’s happening at work.”

To avoid committing such blunders we need to remind ourselves that, as we converse, it is important to engage in dual perspective talking. This requires that, while we not abandon our own feelings, we make a concerted effort to take the other person’s feelings into account as we interact. Conversations help define relationships.

Insensitivity is not the only cause of conversational blunders. Sometimes prejudiced talk also damages conversations. Prejudiced talk includes the making of racist, sexist, or ageist comments in public.25 Because it emphasizes differences rather than similarities, such talk functions to separate, distance, and enhance feelings of power for the user of the questionable language rather than unite, bring individuals from diverse groups closer together, or equalize the perceived power bases from which they operate. Because most of us try to present ourselves as unprejudiced when we interact with others, we are apt to preface prejudiced talk with a disclaimer in which we claim not to be prejudiced. As noted earlier, however, once we speak them aloud, we cannot easily take back our words. The damage is done, and the persons in the relationship will feel its effects.

428

True or False 4.Once you have said something wrong in a conversation, you can never repair the damage. True. Though we may lessen the negative consequences of our words, we cannot erase the effects of what we have said.

CULTURAL DIFFERENCE AND CONVERSATION

Culture and conversation are related. Our culture influences our beliefs about the nature and value of conversation. For example, conversation is more important to European Americans than it is to native-born Chinese or Chinese Americans. For that reason, European Americans are much more likely to initiate and engage in conversations with others than are Chinese Americans. Whereas European Americans view talk as a tool to gain social control, the Chinese view the absence of talk, or silence, as a control strategy.26 From their collectivist perspective, talk is not necessary for relationship development, whereas from the individualist perspective held by European Americans, it is.

Conversational blunder: A faux pas; the uttering of something someone else is apt to find objectionable.

Prejudiced talk: Talk that includes racist, sexist, or ageist comments or comments denigrating any other kind of group.

The difference between high-context cultures such as those of Asia and Africa and low-context cultures such as those of the United States and most Western European countries is also reflected in the word choices of members. During their conversations, members of low-context cultures are more likely to utter words such as absolutely, positively, and most

429

definitely, while members of high-context cultures are more likely to use fewer categorical words while employing more provisional language, such as maybe, possibly, and probably. 27 These practices are reflective of contrasting worldviews—the Western worldview being linear and the non- Western worldview being relational and therefore focused on avoiding the use of more extreme wordings.28 Do your experiences confirm this observation?

The Japanese share the collectivist perception; in general, they tend to trust those who are silent more than those who talk a lot. The Japanese value social discretion; they believe that talking can be dangerous to a relationship because it may precipitate social disapproval that may unnecessarily contribute to the embarrassment of others.29 Consequently, rather than risk interpersonal consequences or express disagreement or anger with another, the Japanese prefer to remain silent.

In contrast, people from Arab cultures tend to engage others in conversation much more directly and to use an abundance of overassertions or exaggerations when conversing.30 Often, for example, a simple no is construed by other Arabs to mean yes, and thus, Arabs must rely on verbal exaggeration to make or drive home a point.31

WATCH THIS 7–2 For a video on effective conversation skills visit the student study site.

Puerto Rico, a collectivist, high-context culture, shares a number of characteristics with Asian cultures. Like Asians, Puerto Ricans typically do their best to reduce the risk of any conversational confrontation, preferring to be more imprecise and indirect when it comes to clarifying a message’s meaning rather than explicit and direct. What is not said in a conversation with someone from Puerto Rico may be more significant than what is said.32

Feelings about turn taking also vary among cultures. Because they value succinctness rather than verboseness, for example, people from Asian cultures tend to take short turns when conversing and try to distribute turns evenly.33 In contrast, North Americans tend to take longer turns, which they distribute unevenly, with the participant who initiated a topic

430

characteristically attempting to monopolize conversation. To the extent that we understand such differences, we increase our chances of facilitating effective conversations with people from diverse cultures.

GENDER DIFFERENCES AND CONVERSATION

Men and women view and define conversation differently. A number of the differences are attributable to the value men place on instrumental behavior and their preference for engaging in organized activities or interacting in groups and the value women place on talk and their preference for engaging in one-on-one, person-to-person communication.34 Underscoring this basic difference, linguist Deborah Tannen notes that for men, conversations “are negotiations in which people try to achieve and maintain the upper hand if they can, and protect themselves from others’ attempts to put them down and push them around,” whereas for women, conversations “are negotiations for closeness in which people try to seek and give confirmation and support, and to reach consensus. They [women] try to protect themselves from others’ attempt to push them away.”35 As a result, women and men often misunderstand each other’s intentions. Women wonder why men are not interested in discussing a situation’s details, and men wonder why women want to waste their time talking about trivial matters.

Conversation is a collaborative effort.

Conversation is a collaborative effort. Everything that happens during conversation is the doing of the participants, including interrupting. For interruption to succeed, one speaker begins speaking before being yielded

431

the floor, and another speaker must stop speaking as a result. Men and women differ in the amount of interrupting they do during their conversations with each other. Interrupting provides the interrupter with an opportunity to violate the turn-taking system, exercise his or her conversational power, and assume greater conversational control.

REFLECT ON THIS: Interruptitis

Who do you think interrupts more—men or women? Typically, the interrupter is male.

In this excerpt from her book Gender and Discourse, researcher and sociolinguist Deborah Tannen focuses on a gender-based conversational perception:

A joke has it that a woman sues her husband for divorce. When the judge asks her why she wants a divorce, she explains that her husband has not spoken to her in two years. The judge then asks the husband, “Why haven’t you spoken to your wife in two years?” He replies, “I didn’t want to interrupt her.”

This joke reflects the commonly held stereotype that women talk too much and interrupt men. On the other hand, one of the most widely cited findings to emerge from research on gender and language is that men interrupt women far more than women interrupt men. This finding is deeply satisfying insofar as it refutes the misogynistic stereotype and seems to account for the difficulty getting their voices heard that many women report having in interactions with men. At the same time, it reflects and bolsters common assumptions about the world: the belief that an interruption is a hostile act, with the interrupter an aggressor and the interrupted an innocent victim. Furthermore, it is founded on the premise that interruption is a means of social control, an

432

exercise of power and dominance.

Consider this: To what extent do your experiences support or contradict the observations of Tannen and others? Explain your answers using specific examples.

SOURCES: See V. Chand, “Linguistic Anthropology,” Current Anthropology, 46, 2005, p. 261–362.

Deborah Tannen, Gender and Discourse, New York: Oxford University Press, 1994, p. 54–55.

However, in other situations, interruptions can be construed not as power plays but as a sign of conversational or social comfort, where one party feels free to interrupt the other and the interrupted party does not feel infringed on and does not resent the interruption.36 When this occurs, there is a conversation duet or supportive cooperative overlapping, which actually greases a conversation’s wheels, encouraging and reinforcing the speaker, rather than an attempt at conversational domination, which can and often does bring conversation to a halt.37

MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGY TALK

Media and technology have changed how we converse in person as well as via computers and smartphones. As we observed in the introduction to this chapter, technology increases opportunities for communication. The question is, however, whether we are sacrificing meaningful conversation for mere connection—a concern expressed by author, psychologist, and MIT professor Sherry Turkle. Turkle observes that we have become too comfortable being “alone together.”38 Technology frees us to be with each other and somewhere else simultaneously. We want to pay attention to what interests us, but not necessarily the person we are with. Even as we connect, Turkle notes, we hide. She quotes the words of a wistful sixteen- year-old: “Someday, someday, but certainly not now, I’d like to learn how to have a conversation.”39 Far too many of us are not comfortable conversing face-to-face. We wear headsets connected to smartphones and computers, keeping even people who are near us at a distance. According to Turkle, no matter how valuable Twitter and Facebook are, connecting with others through them does not substitute for conversation—the means

433

of communicating that calls on us to see things from another’s perspective.40 Unfortunately, even when conversing face-to-face, we sometimes fail to achieve that goal.

ANALYZE THIS: Don’t Finish My Thoughts

Read the following selection from Henrik Ibsen’s classic play A Doll’s House, in which Torvald Helmer and his wife, Nora, whom he has always treated as though she were a child, are engaged in a conversation:

Nora: (Looking at her watch.) It’s not so late yet. Sit down, Torvald; you and I have much to say to each other. (She sits at one side of the table.)

Helmer: Nora—what does this mean? Your cold, set face—

Nora: Sit down. It will take some time. I have much to talk overwith you. (Helmer sits at the other side of the table.)

Helmer: You alarm me, Nora. I don’t understand you.

Nora:

No, that is just it. You don’t understand me; and I have never understood you—till to-night. No, don’t interrupt. Only listen to what I say.—We must come to a final settlement, Torvald.

Helmer: How do you mean?

Nora: (After a short silence.) Does not one thing strike you as wesit here?

434

Helmer: What should strike me?

Nora: We have been married eight years. Does it not strike you that this is the first time we two, you and I, man and wife, have talked together seriously?

Helmer: Seriously! What do you call seriously?

Nora: During eight whole years, and more—ever since the day we first met—we have never exchanged one serious word about serious things.

Helmer: Was I always to trouble you with the cares you could nothelp me to bear?

Nora: I am not talking of cares. I say that we have never yet setourselves seriously to get to the bottom of anything.

Helmer: Why, my dearest Nora, what have you to do with seriousthings?

Nora: There we have it! You have never understood me—

1. What can you tell about Nora and Torvald’s relationship from this brief conversation?

2. Have you ever initiated a conversation similar to this one that signaled a turning point in a close relationship?

3. If so, did the person you were addressing attempt to interrupt you? Did you attempt to interrupt him or her? How did each of you respond?

SOURCE: Henrik Ibsen, A Doll’s House (1879), translated by William Archer, in Six Plays by Henrik Ibsen, New York: Barnes & Noble Classics, 2003, p. 311–312.

TRY THIS: Squawk Talk Think about the ways your conversation or your expectations for conversation have been influenced by broadcast programs and films. To what extent, if any, do you think we use such offerings to learn how to

435

talk to each other and what to talk about?

1. Cite an example of conversation initiation, topic focusing, and termination used in a television sitcom or drama, film, or talk show that you have copied or used in conversation with another person. Compare and contrast the results you achieved with the media results.

2. Listen to or view a talk show. Count the number of times the show’s host or guests attack, embarrass, and/or insult each other; raise their voices; interrupt each other; or otherwise display anger, frustration, or impatience with one another.

3. In your opinion, does poor conversational behavior make “good” radio or television? If yes, why? If no, how do you account for the popularity of shows featuring such behavior?

MEDIA TALK The nature of conversation on radio and television talk shows has coarsened over the years. Even during presidential debates, the candidates talk over one another. Instead of mirroring the “constructive buzz of the public square,” too frequently participants demonstrate their incivility. On programs such as The O’Reilly Factor, Imus in the Morning, and The Rush Limbaugh Show, hosts and guests commonly use insults, speech that degrades, and pronouncements that encourage defensiveness or hostile reactions. Hosts and guests repeatedly verbally attack and chronically interrupt one another, exhibit little patience for alternative points of view, belittle each other, and raise their voices so that they literally yell at and talk over each other. While at the same time offering few examples of genuine, well-mannered, and well-informed conversation, the media provide a multitude of negative models of conversation for listeners and viewers to emulate when interacting with each other.41

436

True or False 5. Texting is taking the place of face-to-face conversations. True. Many prefer texting to conversing orally.

TECHNOLOGY TALK Advances in technology are contributing to many of us finding it difficult to imagine person-to-person contact apart from electronic connections. Cyberspace is constantly in our hands or worn over our ears. Legions of people walk down the street or sit in cafés communicating with others who are not physically present in the same space. We have the ability to converse with virtually anyone, no matter where he or she is located, at any time. And when we do so, we are more apt to be blunt, sometimes even cruel, than we are in face-to-face encounters.

True or False

5. Texting is taking the place of face-to-face conversations.

True. Many prefer texting to conversing orally.

For some of us, talking face-to-face or on cell phones is passé; we prefer texting—even when the person we want to text shares an environment we are in. Some of us think nothing of interrupting a face-to-face conversation to respond to someone who is not present, but who is calling, texting, or tweeting us. For some reason, the person reaching out via technology tends to be given priority to interrupt our “real-world” conversations. Some observers have asserted that face-to-face conversation may be in jeopardy, that we may be jettisoning verbal communication. In fact, surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center have found that text messaging on a smart phone is teenagers’ favored means of communicating, with half of

437

teens sending sixty or more text messages daily (up from fifty in 2009) and one-third sending more than one hundred.42

Describe how you feel when someone with whom you’re conversing multitasks while interacting with you.

Prior to computer-mediated communication, or Describe how you feel when someone with whom you’re conversing CMC, we were typically aware of whom we were multitasks while interacting with you. conversing with. When we tweet or post online, however, we may be doing so without full knowledge of everyone who will read and react to our words because the person(s) we intend our posts for can send them on to others without our permission or knowledge.

In addition, technology makes it commonplace for us to multitask. We often find ourselves participating in multiple conversations simultaneously. While we sometimes do the same when engaged in face- to-face discussions, in those instances usually those with whom we are interacting are aware of our side conversations. This is not necessarily true when we go online; when online we can conduct an array of conversations with a number of persons, each of whom might believe we are interacting solely with him or her while we text others, talk on our cell, or tweet yet someone else. While our attention is divided, somehow we manage to keep numerous conversational threads going. It is as if we keep our finger on the shoulders of a number of people, tapping away, to keep them in our conversational sphere. Unlike person-to-person conversation, however, Twitter gives you a microphone, a means of listening in on millions of conversations daily.43

438

Unlike our contributions to face-to-face conversations, blog entries can be reread and revised before we post them.

How is all this media multitasking affecting us? It may be hurting some of us—especially teenagers— socially and emotionally. In fact, face-to-face time correlates with higher levels of social confidence.44 It may well be that watching others’ faces lets us better interpret their emotions, which makes us feel more comfortable socially and more emotionally engaged. Looking at people, not just devices and not just via Skype, is key.45

Blogging provides another means we use to compose our thoughts and share our ideas with others. Years back, people recorded their secret wishes, regrets, social problems, and the like in personal diaries. Today, we use blogs (a term derived from Web logs) to write about our problems, vent, relieve stress, and permit others to respond. For the most part, reader responses to personal revelations tend to be supportive, helping the blogger put things in perspective.46 As with all forms of conversation, however, while we can use a blog to comment on our hopes, likes and dislikes, opinions, and other views, we can also use it to spread rumors and gossip.47 Bloggers tend to write on a regular basis, but unlike face-to-face conversations, which are for the most part spontaneous, blog entries can be reread and revised before they are posted a means of linking for others to read and respond to.

Computer-mediated communication: Communication that uses

439

computers as a means of linking individuals.

Whereas face-to-face conversations have clear beginnings and endings, a conversation begun in cyberspace may terminate without our full awareness. In other words, our conversational partner can disengage without notifying us. How do you feel when, in the midst of an online chat, you discover that you literally are talking to yourself? Would you prefer that your partner clue you in to his or her departure, perhaps by typing “gotta go”? What if a partner you had been talking to face-to-face simply walked away without so much as a word? Are the two situations comparable? While the latter is unexpected, sadly, more and more people are accepting abrupt technological disconnections as normal. Do you?

GAINING COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE: IMPROVING YOUR CONVERSATION SKILLS

Developing the skills noted in the following can facilitate your ability to participate in and manage conversations more effectively.

DEVELOP METACONVERSATIONAL ABILITIES Just as metacommunication is communication about communication, metaconversation is conversation about conversation. Be willing to talk with your conversational partner about how you talk to one another. Share your insights about intentions, messages sent, perceived contradictions or inconsistencies, and impressions of each others’ thoughts and feelings. It is important to commit to developing a greater understanding of the factors involved in effective conversation.

DEVELOP AWARENESS OF HOW CULTURE AND GENDER DIFFERENCES AFFECT CONVERSATION In practicing your skills, be aware of how culture and gender differences may influence your conversational style and reaction to each other. What works in China may not work in the United States or in Muslim countries. To facilitate interaction with people whose cultural background or gender differs from your own, you need to open yourself to and respect the differences that exist, maintain a flexible rather than rigid outlook, and engage in conversation to increase your understanding of one another. This means that you need to be unconditionally accepting of differences; you should not make others feel that they have to conform to your preferences

440

for you to interact with them.

STRIVE TO IMPROVE CONVERSATION INITIATION, MANAGEMENT, AND TERMINATION ABILITIES Every communicator shares responsibility for beginning, managing, and terminating conversations. This means we are each responsible for performing speaking and listening functions, and we are each responsible for ensuring that we take advantage of conversational opportunities.

To that end, you need to monitor your own behavior in addition to monitoring the behavior of the person you are conversing with. Demonstrate your concern for others in addition to your concern for yourself. Practice active listening, be sensitive to expressions that signal turn-taking preferences, find ways to communicate your personal involvement and your interest—or your lack of personal involvement and disinterest—in appropriate ways, and terminate or attain conversational closure in a manner that is confirming and nonoffensive, leaving the door open for possible future encounters.

Metaconversation: Conversation about conversation.

CONNECT THE CASE: The Case of Company Party

It would be one of those company parties—the kind where you don’t really know anyone, so you stand around and feel awkward and totally unconnected. Even though he wasn’t the chitchatty type, Alberto knew he was expected to attend. He told himself that it meant he would have to spend time interacting with people he really didn’t want to spend any extra time with. He had no interest in them, just as they probably had no interest in him.

441

Alberto thought about trying to get out of going to the party. He considered using the old “car trouble” excuse, but he dismissed that idea quickly because it was trite and seemed too obvious. He had gone so far as to mention to a coworker that he wasn’t feeling well, but he knew that his not showing up at the party would only create more problems for him. So a little while after testing out the “sickness” excuse, he had said he felt better. Alberto saw no way out. He had to go. He hated the thought of going so much that he went so far as to briefly consider quitting his job to avoid having to be put in these uncomfortable situations time and again. But giving up his job really wasn’t feasible. From the moment Alberto arrived at the party, he felt out of place, just as he thought he would. Not one person approached him, and he didn’t approach anyone either. He longed to find a quiet little corner, sit down, and do his best to look introspective. He considered interacting with the catering staff so that he wouldn’t stand out as unapproachable. He took out his cell and pretended to text. Suddenly, seemingly out of nowhere, a person Alberto had never spoken to before stood before him. Alberto was dumbstruck. He could think of nothing to say. He opened his mouth, hoping some interesting words would come out, but his nerves got the better of him. Alberto was a wreck. As he excused himself, uttering something about having just received an emergency text, and hurried to leave the room, an even sicker feeling consumed him. Looking at the framed picture on the wall of the hallway, Alberto realized that the person he had just turned his back on was the company’s president and chairman of the board.

Consider these questions:

1. If you were Alberto’s friend, what advice would you give him about how to survive and thrive at a company party or similar function?

2. Have you ever been in a situation similar to the one Alberto found himself in? How did you handle it? How would you handle it now?

REVIEW THIS

442

CHAPTER SUMMARY

1 Define small talk, conversation, and conversational turn taking and enumerate the skills shared by good conversationalists. Small talk is spontaneous conversation; it facilitates our making contact with others. Conversation is a “relatively informal social interaction in which the roles of speaker and hearer are exchanged in a nonautomatic fashion under the collaborative management of all parties.”48 Conversational turn-taking facilitates the maintenance and flow of a conversation. Affecting turn taking are turnmaintaining and turn-yielding signals, turn-requesting and turn-denying signals, and backchannel signals.

2 Identify the five parts of a conversation. Most conversations proceed in the following five stages: greeting, topic priming, heart of the conversation, preliminary processing, and closing. Each stage serves different functions and occupies an important place in the conversation’s life.

3 Describe how cultural and gender differences influence feelings and perceptions of the nature and value of conversation. Both cultural and gender differences influence our attitudes about the nature and value of conversation. For example, while the members of some cultures view talk as a means of gaining social control, others use silence for this purpose. Whereas for men conversations are negotiations for achievement, for women they are negotiations for closeness

4 Discuss how the media and technology are helping to reinforce or change both the substance and the nature of conversation. Media talk shows are providing models of incivility, leading to the coarsening of conversations. New technologies are widening the kinds of conversations we are having, freeing us to conduct multiple conversations simultaneously, some of which are face-to-face and some of which take place in cyberspace.

5 Identify specific steps you can take to improve your conversational skills. By working to increase your understanding of conversations and taking the time to develop your conversational skills, you can enrich your potential for developing meaningful relationships.

443

CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING

1 Can you offer an example that displays the role small talk plays in relationship building? (See page 190.)

2 Can you create a scenario illustrating the difference between an effective and an ineffective conversationalist? (See pages 190–191.)

3 Can you deconstruct a recorded conversation by identifying its parts? (See pages 192–196.)

4 Can you describe specific ways in which gender, culture, media, and technology affect your conversational exchanges? (See pages 200–206.)

5 Can you devise a plan to enhance your conversational skills? (See page 206.)

CHECK YOUR SKILLS

1 Can you engage in conversation comfortably with a new acquaintance? (See pages 191–192 and page 195; Try This, page 191; and Try This, page 192.)

2 Can you apply the rules of everyday conversation when interacting with others? (See pages 190–193 and 196–200; and Try This, page 193.)

3 Can you identify the phases of a conversation? (See pages 193.)

4 Can you use an appropriate conversational opener to signal your accessibility? (See page194.)

5 Can you use both open- and closed-ended questions, depending on your conversational goals? (See pages 194–195.)

6 Can you close a conversation skillfully? (See page 196.)

444

7 Can you use and respond competently to turn-taking signals? (See page 197; and Try This, page 198.)

8 Can you adjust the nature of your conversation to reflect the culture- and gender-influenced preferences of another person? (See pages 200– 201; Reflect on This, page 202; and Analyze This, page 203.)

9 Can you distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate conversation in media offerings and online social interactions? (See pages 202–206; and Try This, page 204.)

10 Can you diagnose and overcome conversational challenges? (See The Case of the Company Party, page 207.)

KEY TERMS

Small talk 190

Conversation deprivation 190

Conversation 191

Conversational rules 191

Conversational structure 192

Open-ended question 195

Closed-ended question 195

Conversational maintenance 195

Conversational turn taking 196

Turn-maintaining signals 197

Turn-yielding signals 197

Turn-requesting signals 197

Turn-denying signals 197

Backchannel signals 197

Quality maxim 197

Quantity maxim 197

Relevancy maxim 197

445

Manner maxim 198

Monologue 198

Dialogue 198

Conversational blunder 200

Prejudiced talk 200

Computer-mediated communication 205

Metaconversation 206

STUDENT STUDY SITE

Visit the student study site at www.sagepub.com/gambleic to access the following materials:

• SAGE Journal Articles

• Videos

• Web Resources

• eFlashcards

• Web Quizzes

• Study Questions

446

8Chapter

Emotions are contagious.

—Karl Jung

Anyone can be angry—that is easy. But to be angry with the right person to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose, and in the right way—that is not easy.

—Aristotle

EMOTIONS 447

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this chapter, you should be able to demonstrate mastery of the following learning outcomes:

1. Describe the benefits of emotional intelligence and the consequences of emotional ineptitude.

2. Explain the role that emotions play in emotion contagion. 3. Compare and contrast emotion states and emotion traits. 4. Identify how emotions can contribute to relationship facilitation or

relationship debilitation. 5. Describe how culture and gender affect the expression of emotion. 6. Discuss how the media and technology serve as both models and

channels for the emotions we exhibit. 7. Identify steps you can take to share emotions more effectively.

urprise—your friend dyed her hair an interesting shade of purple! Sadness—your grandfather’s cancer is incurable. Anger—your BFF has been secretly going out with your significant other. Fear—you hear a gunshot right outside your home. Emotions are powerful

forces that help to mark the high and low points of our lives. Falling in love, having a baby, grieving, experiencing an act of violence personally or vicariously—all these arouse our emotions. Our emotional responses reveal what we care about and what we think is of consequence.

Emotions are powerful forces that help to mark the high and low points of our lives.

Because our emotions may move us in ways we do not anticipate, sometimes they also get the better of us.1 They may, for example, affect our judgments and our ability to make rational decisions.2 This can happen, for example, if we overidentify with another person’s pain or joy, or become paralyzed by fear.3 When we are overwhelmed with emotion, we can find it challenging to control our reactions. And when handled poorly, emotions can have frightening effects, sometimes leading us to the dark side of emotional experience, where visceral fear and anger take over and rationality disappears. Daniel Goleman notes numerous examples of this happening in his often-cited book Emotional Intelligence.4 When a

448

student goes on a violent rampage after being insulted by another student, a motorist experiences road rage after being cut off by another motorist, or a Neighborhood Watch member responds to a perceived threat by “standing his ground” and shooting a weaponless teenager, we are witness to the effects of out-of-control, badly managed emotions.

WHAT DO YOU KNOW?

Before continuing your reading of this chapter, which of the following five statements do you believe to be true and which do you believe to be false?

1. Feeling depressed affects your breathing. T F

2. Anger is the briefest of all emotions. T F

3. We feel closer to those people we laugh with. T F

4. The use of Botox contributes to emotional expressiveness.

T F

5. On Twitter, good news travels faster than bad news. T F

Read the chapter to discover if you’re right or if you’ve made any erroneous assumptions.

ANSWER: 1. T, 2. F, 3. T, 4. F, 5. F,

Emotional intelligence helps us maintain emotional balance. It also helps

449

us keep our relationships healthy. When in possession of emotional intelligence we motivate ourselves to persist in the face of frustration, to control impulses and delay gratification, and to regulate our moods so we keep distress from swamping our ability to think, to empathize, and to hope.5 In contrast, emotional ineptitude, or the inability to control an emotional response, is the root cause of many relationship problems. Once we have an emotional outburst, we may regret it, but the relational damage is done.

In this chapter, we explore steps can we take to prevent relational damage, including how we can recognize our feelings and better understand our emotions so that when we respond, we don’t end up hurting ourselves. By shaping our emotional habits, we take steps to prevent either out-of-control or festering emotions from destroying our relationships—overtly or insidiously.

How we feel about a situation influences our emotional response.

WHAT ARE EMOTIONS?

Emotions are the feelings we experience in reaction to our surroundings and others. Emotions are our stimuli for responding to the differences we perceive between the self and the environment.6 For example, if we sense a personal gain from a relationship, we are apt to feel confident. On the other hand, if we feel threatened by the relationship, we are apt to feel anxious. Thus, it is how we feel about the interpersonal situation that influences our emotions, feelings, and emotional response to the situation.

450

Our emotions are accompanied by physiological changes within our bodies and physical changes in our appearance. Some emotions, such as anger, increase respiration and heart rate and may cause us to become tense and flushed and to raise our voices or strike out at those around us. Other emotions have the opposite effects. For example, depression slows respiration and may cause us to visibly pale, sit sullenly, or cry uncontrollably.

By becoming more aware of our emotional responses to people and events and others’ responses to us, we become more aware of what it is about the relationships we share that is important to us. For example, we may enjoy being with some people because they make us laugh. Laughter is believed to correlate with feelings of well-being, primarily because of the release of endorphins—brain chemicals known for their feel-good effect.7

As noted in our discussion of perception in Chapter 3, not everyone responds to the same stimulus in the same way or with the same intensity. Each of us experiences unique physical and psychological sensations as our emotions affect us in complicated ways. By focusing on both response differences and similarities, we can learn about our unique emotional style and how we can best cope with our feelings.8 As one theorist observes, “The joyful person is more apt to see the world through ‘rose colored glasses,’ the distressed or sad individual is more apt to construe the remarks of others as critical, and the fearful person is inclined to have tunnel vision, that is, to see only the frightening object.”9 Thus, our emotions help color our relationships.

Emotional intelligence: The ability to motivate oneself or to persist in the face of frustration; to control impulse and delay gratification; to regulate one’s mood and keep distress from swamping the abilities to think, empathize, and hope.

Emotional ineptitude: The inability to handle and control one’s emotional responses.

Emotions: The feelings one experiences in reaction to one’s surroundings.

Developmental psychologist Howard Gardner believes that at the very core of intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence are the ability to gain “access to one’s own feelings and the ability to discriminate among them and draw upon them to guide behavior,” together with the “capacities to

451

discern and respond appropriately to the moods, temperaments, motivations, and desires of other people.”10 By developing a broader awareness of and sensitivity to feelings through “mindfulness mediation,” we also can cultivate greater resilience, an ability to cope with and recover quickly from disappointments.11

True or False 1. Feeling depressed affects your breathing. True. Depression slows respiration.

WHY EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE IS IMPORTANT Emotional intelligence is a form of social intelligence—the ability to understand and relate to people.12 According to Gardner both intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence are integral components of social intelligence.

With intrapersonal intelligence, we are able to recognize our own emotions and manage them by finding ways to handle such feelings as fear, anxiety, anger, and sadness. What is more, we learn to display emotional self- control, which frees us to channel our emotions in the service of a goal. By knowing ourselves, we are more likely to recognize similar emotions in others, a skill that strengthens interpersonal intelligence.

Monitoring our own emotions is critical for developing self-understanding. When emotionally intelligent, we monitor our own and others’ emotions, discriminating among the emotions we experience and using what we discern to guide our thinking and actions.13 For example, does arguing with a friend ruin the rest of your day? If a dinner engagement is canceled, do you feel depressed for hours? How quickly do you recover from disappointments? Once we get in touch with our true feelings, we can

452

learn to control them; failing to develop such awareness leaves us at their mercy. Learning to manage our emotions enables us to develop the resilience necessary for us to bounce back from setbacks and upsets. With greater resilience, we are better able to shake off feelings that debilitate and/or de-energize us.

The ability to employ the appropriate emotions in pursuit of a goal is also a useful skill. By displaying emotional self-control and a willingness to delay gratification, we facilitate goal realization.

As you learned in the discussion of listening in Chapter 4, empathy, the ability to tune in to what others are feeling and to feel with them, is an important interaction skill. Those who are emotionally tone-deaf usually do not have as many fulfilling relationships as do the emotionally attuned. In fact, to become interpersonally effective, we need to develop our ability to manage emotions in others as well as in ourselves.14

THE LOOK AND FEEL OF EMOTIONS Years ago, there was a hit song titled “The Look of Love.” Have you ever stopped to consider what love actually looks like? When we are in love, our facial expressions and body language often reveal our emotions to others. (See Chapter 6 on nonverbal communication.) In fact, while different cultures may have rules that guide emotional displays, the physical expressions associated with particular emotions appear to be virtually universal. For that reason, even without understanding another’s language, we are often able to identify the emotion the person is expressing—we can tell whether he or she is angry, feels threatened, or feels at ease and is having a good time.

According to nonverbal communication expert Paul Ekman, particular facial patterns support the expression of each emotion.15 Let us see how this works for a number of selected emotions.

Resilience: The ability to cope with and recover quickly from disappointments.

Social intelligence: The ability to understand and relate to people.

Emotionally tone-deaf: Unable to listen empathetically.

453

True or False 2. Anger is the briefest of all emotions. False. Surprise is the briefest of all emotions.

Surprise! Surprise is the briefest of all emotions, flitting quickly across our faces. We express surprise by lifting our eyebrows, creating horizontal wrinkles across the forehead, slightly raising our upper eyelids, and usually opening the mouth in an oval shape. The lifting of the eyebrows also allows us to take in a larger visual area and enables more light to strike the retina. Surprise may transform into happiness if the stimulus that caused it leads to something favorable; it also may transform into anger or fright if the event that created it in the first place leads to a perceived threat or outrage.

Anger. Anger is an emotion that has garnered a lot of attention because of the damage it can do if poorly handled. We feel anger when someone interferes with our ability to pursue or attain a goal, restraining us, physically or psychologically, by holding us back or by causing us to feel that we are incapable or unworthy. Actions of others that reveal disregard for our feelings or disdain for us may also produce in us feelings of anger and hostility. When we experience anger or hostility, we usually lower our eyebrows and draw them together to create a scowl or a frown. Often we stare at the object or person that elicited these feelings and tightly compress our lips or draw them back in a squarelike shape to reveal our clenched teeth. Our face may redden, and the veins in our neck and head may become more visible to others. As anger surges through us, blood flows to our hands, making it easier for us to grasp a weapon or, should we desire to do so, strike out; our heart rate increases, and adrenalin prepares us for possible action.16

454

Because contemporary American society discourages overt expressions of anger, we might conclude that expressing anger is dangerous and unhealthy. If communicated properly, however, it is neither. In fact, while it may be unhealthy to express a lot of anger often, it is better to express some anger than to avoid expressing anger at all. Research has found that the moderate expression of anger, compared with little or no expression, cuts the risk of heart attack and stroke in half.17 Persons who do not express their anger at all have been found to be more likely to exhibit passive-aggressive behavior or a negative and hostile personality. It is important that we learn constructive ways to express angry feelings, using assertiveness rather than aggressiveness. Also of value is learning how to redirect angry feelings and calm down.

Lashing out unthinkingly takes a toll on a relationship.

When we express our feelings aggressi