due in 6 hours

earning Objectives

In this chapter, readers will explore the basics of interpersonal communication. By the end of this

chapter, readers will be able to

 Understand the specific components of communication

 Describe the overarching models of the communication process

 Define interpersonal communication, including its functions, challenges, and benefits

 Understand how this text will help make you a more competent interpersonal communicator

Introduction Humans are social beings. We depend on other people to meet our needs, and we form and interact in

organized groups such as families, neighborhoods, teams, clubs, and societies to spend time with and

assist one another. Communication with other people helps us understand ourselves, others, and our

world. Our bonds with siblings, friends, romantic partners, neighbors, colleagues, and classmates give

our lives meaning, even when such bonds challenge and frustrate us. For these reasons, how we

communicate, connect with others, and build and maintain relationships is the subject of this text.

You probably know from your own experiences that communication can go astray, and

misunderstandings can occur in any number of ways. Perhaps the receiver cannot hear or does not pay

attention to the message being sent. Maybe equipment used to transmit the message fails, such as

when a call from a mobile phone is dropped. You can also likely recall specific instances of successful

communication when the interaction resulted in positive change or mutual understanding. Consider the

following conversation:

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

Pat replies via e-mail: You never told me that you were going to be home early enough to have dinner

together, so I'm not sure.

Kim, via e-mail: I did. I told you this past weekend.

Pat, via e-mail: I don't remember you saying anything about being home for dinner. I'm leaving work

now, so text my cell.

Kim replies via text message: Ugh, this is an annoying way to carry on this conversation. But I still have

to say, you never listen when I tell you something.

Pat, who is driving home, does not reply because his phone is in his pocket.

Kim, via text message: Hello, are you ignoring me?

Pat, once he is home, checks his mobile phone and sees Kim's text message. He calls Kim, who is now

on her way home from work: Hey, it's me. I just got your text because I was driving. I was not ignoring

you.

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

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

Pat: You are making a big deal out of nothing. Can we just figure out what we are doing for dinner? I'm

hungry.

Kim: Oh, I'm making a big deal out of nothing?

You likely have engaged in a similar conversation. The interaction contains multiple elements of

interpersonal communication, and we will use it as an example throughout this chapter to illustrate the

complexity of Kim and Pat's seemingly everyday encounter.

Chapter 1 examines the nature of communication and its importance in your life. This chapter

introduces several important definitions, elements, and models of communication, as well as providing a

brief overview of the foundation of communication as an academic discipline. In addition, this chapter

defines interpersonal communication, investigates its functions and challenges, and considers the

benefits of studying this specific type of communication.

1.1 What Is Communication? Communication, in its various forms, channels, and contexts, is a fundamental aspect of being human. In

fact, as newborn babies, our first cry is a message to the world that we have arrived, and as infants we

are often consoled by a gentle touch or the soothing voice of our caregivers. We soon learn to express

our thoughts, feelings, needs, and desires through behavior and language, to listen and respond to

others when they communicate with us, and to use communication to build, maintain, and even end a

variety of relationships.

The word communication can be traced back to the Latin word communicare, which means "to join or

unite," "to connect," "to participate in," or "to share with all." Other words that emerge from this root

word include common, commune, communion, and community. Reflecting its roots, this text defines

communication as a process where two or more individuals strive to create shared meaning using verbal

and nonverbal messages in a variety of contexts. This definition highlights five primary characteristics of

communication:

 Two or more people are involved.

 It is a process.

 There is an attempt to create shared meaning.

 Both verbal and nonverbal messages influence interactions.

 It occurs in a variety of contexts.

The intricacies of each element are discussed next.

1. Communication Involves Two or More People Communication requires a minimum of two individuals. In other words, we cannot communicate unless

there is at least one other person to interact with. Certainly, we can also communicate with more than

two individuals, and mediated channels, such as television and the Internet, can even allow us to

communicate with millions of people. Finally, it is important to note, according to the definition

discussed here, that talking to ourselves or internally exploring who we are as individuals is not

communication, even though doing so is called intrapersonal communication. This is a different type of

communication, which we will evaluate in Chapter 2.

2. Communication Is a Process In 1960, communication theorist David Berlo described communication as a constantly evolving

interaction or activity that changes each of us and changes our relationships to one another over time.

The word process might bring to mind an action that has some purpose or is directed to some end; an

action that is dynamic, ongoing, and ever changing. When you meet someone for the first time, for

example, you approach each other as strangers. The communication that occurs during this first meeting

will then influence or shape the next meeting you have with one another. If the first meeting was a

positive experience, you will generally expect the second interaction to be positive as well. On the other

hand, if the first meeting did not go well, you may approach the second meeting with some concern or

trepidation because you expect to have a similar experience.

Communication is a continuous and complex process affected by past events, influenced by how the

current interaction unfolds, and impacting interactions to come as well as the future of the relationship.

Because communication is ongoing, we continually work to build, maintain, alter, and sometimes even

terminate relationships. Over time, we change and others change, and thus our communication within

our relationships changes.

3. Communication Is Shared Meaning The fundamental purpose of human communication is to allow people to generate and share their

thoughts, feelings, experiences, beliefs, opinions, or really anything they can think to express. People

communicate in the hope that such ideas have meanings for others too and that they will understand.

This understanding, or meaning, and the shared view of reality are best achieved through

communication.

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

following event.

A small black bear cub, apparently abandoned by its mother, wandered into a rural neighborhood and

lived in the undergrowth and trees in the neighborhood for more than five days. Because the animal

showed no signs of leaving, state Fish and Wildlife Department authorities were called to capture the

bear and remove it from the property. They shot the cub with a tranquilizer gun, but the cub scurried up

a large tree and fell asleep. The tree was too tall for any ladder to reach and too wide to encircle with a

safety harness, a requirement if an authority were to climb, but the bear cub was in danger of falling to

an almost certain death at any moment. For approximately one hour, neighbors and wildlife officials

anxiously waited for a resolution. Then the cub awakened and began to move. The small branch on

which the cub rested broke, and the bear suddenly dropped a few feet to a second branch. The small

cub dangled high above the ground, holding onto the branch with its two front paws. Slowly it lost its

grip and dropped toward the ground, bouncing off two or three tree branches on the way down. As it

fell, wildlife officers ran toward the tree, gripping a tarp tightly, and caught the cub safely using the open

canvas.

Although you were not present at the exact moment to witness the event described above, you can

easily visualize it because of a shared language and shared use of symbols. When we talk with other

people about an experience, however, the communication is only an abstraction of that experience. For

example, a reporter who is present at the event and then writes a story about the bear cub shares his

perception of the situation as it unfolds. He might report as many facts as possible, but he also might

make it sound like a more dramatic event than it was to keep readers interested in the story.

Maria Teijeiro/Photodisc/Thinkstock

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

That story, however, is just one person's representation, which is a simplified and condensed version of

the entire occurrence. Each witness noticed or focused upon different things during the experience. For

example, the wildlife official who was standing directly under the tree was focusing her attention

entirely on where to best place the tarp to catch the bear cub. Meanwhile, a neighbor, positioned at a

greater distance from the tree with the stranded bear cub, might instead be better able to view the

whole scene, including the potential damage to the tree, nearby structures, or cars if the cub did happen

to fall. Each individual's story would be slightly different even though there is also a great deal of shared

meaning about specific elements of the same event. We will return to the importance of these different

meanings when we discuss culture and perceptions later in this text.

One of the primary goals of human communication is to share meaning and connect with others, but

this is not as easy as it might first seem. We can look up a word in a dictionary, but the definition does

not necessarily account for the word's unique meaning for the person who uses it. Meaning is not in the

message itself; meaning is in the communicator. We each respond to messages based on personal

experiences, cultures, and interpretations. But this can make communication difficult because verbal

and nonverbal messages can mean something different to each of us. It is generally easier to create

shared meaning when we have an established relationship with someone because that person has

shared experiences with us. Communication is thus considered successful when meaning is generally

shared with others, and all parties come to a mutual understanding about the content of the messages

exchanged.

4. Communication Is Verbal and Nonverbal Messages Messages are the actual pieces of information exchanged between individuals in an interaction, and

these messages take two broad forms: verbal and nonverbal. Verbal communication is, put simply,

language or the use of words to communicate. Language provides us with the unique ability to create,

use, and exchange common words or symbols that represent objects and events. Symbols are words,

pictures, sounds, marks, or objects used to represent particular ideas, objects, or qualities.

We can also use language to describe past, present, and future events and to wish, dream, and imagine

objects that do not exist or are not immediately present (Burgoon, Buller, & Woodall, 1996). Nonverbal

communication includes other visual and vocal means, other than language, used to communicate.

There are eight distinct forms of nonverbal communication:

 Physical appearance and attractiveness

 Body movement (the study of kinesics), including posture, facial expressions, and eye contact

 Physical contact with another through touch (haptics)

 Personal space and distance from one another (proxemics)

 Voice and the way something is said, including tone, pitch, rate, and height, and even silence

(vocalics)

 Time and the way it is used (chronemics)

 Scents or odors (olfactics)

 Use or display of objects (artifactics) used to create and shape messages (Burgoon, Guerrero, &

Manusov, 2011)

Although the two types of communication are often studied separately, both verbal and nonverbal

communication messages are present in an interaction. Verbal and nonverbal messages are intrinsically

intertwined, and either complement or contradict one another. Their interplay can change the nature

and interpretation of the interaction.

Think back to the example of Kim and Pat's conversation at the beginning of the chapter. They were

clearly using verbal communication via language in their e-mails and text messages to each other, but

they also engaged in multiple forms of nonverbal communication, including the tones and volumes of

their voices, use of eye contact, gestures, personal distance, and touch. At times, the verbal and

nonverbal messages they were using may have communicated the same thing. For example, Kim's voice

might have sounded angry and been at a higher pitch than normal, and she might have crossed her arms

in front of her chest when she said, "Fine, whatever. I'm almost home myself. I'll talk to you then. Bye."

Maybe Pat's messages offered different or conflicting meanings if he had smiled and spoken in a calm

tone of voice when he said, "You are making a big deal out of nothing."

Even e-mails and text messages, which are communications that contain primarily verbal messages, can

use different forms of nonverbal communication such as capital letters to emphasize a point,

exclamation marks to convey excitement, or emoticons to make a joke or depict sadness (for more

about emoticons, see Everyday Communication Challenges). We will return to the importance of verbal

and nonverbal messages in Chapter 4.

EVERYDAY COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES

Emoticons as Nonverbal Communication Symbols

Today we frequently rely on written language in the form of text messages, e-mails, tweets, and social

media posts to communicate with one another. This form of communication allows us to communicate

with one or thousands of people far and wide but can also limit nonverbal communication. Emoticons,

combinations of keyboard characters that indicate the emotional state of the person writing the

message, were developed to enable us to add some additional nonverbal information to these verbal

messages. For example, a colon and a parenthesis can represent a smile or a frown.

The emoticon was first used by Scott Fahlman and his colleagues in a 1982 Carnegie Mellon University

computer science online bulletin board to clearly indicate board posts that were made in jest (see

Fahlman's discussion of the emoticon and a link to the post where it was first used). In the absence of

visual or auditory cues like smiling and laughter, you can use these nonverbal written symbols to

increase the likelihood of achieving shared meaning. When you tease someone, you can stick out your

tongue :-p or wink ;-) or even laugh out loud LOL.

Emoticons are now so ubiquitous in our mediated communication—communication in which someone

or something intervenes between the sender and the receiver in the communication process—that

many mobile phones include a button that provides a variety of emoticon options. Facebook, Google,

and even Microsoft Word will automatically convert emoticons into stylized faces that are more

illustrative than combinations of punctuation marks. A good rule of thumb is to use emoticons in

moderation, as you would with strong emotions during face-to-face interactions, and be sure only to use

them in informal situations where it is appropriate to bring your emotional state into the messages you

are writing.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. How do you feel about using emoticons in your mediated communication with others? In what

types of situations can they be overused, inappropriate, or misinterpreted?

2. How else can we communicate our emotions when writing messages to one another, especially

in formal or professional situations where emoticons might not be appropriate?

3. How can advances in mediated communication continue to allow us to express our emotions

more easily and accurately?

5. Communication Occurs in a Variety of Contexts The context, or the situation in which communication takes place, affects what we expect to hear and

see, the meaning of what is said, and whether and how we communicate. When we speak of context,

we must consider that people communicate differently in different settings. For example, you would not

communicate and behave at a party the same way you would at work. You may talk and laugh loudly at

a party, or yell to someone from across the room, but you would probably not exhibit these same

behaviors in the workplace.

Digital Vision/Thinkstock

Culture is an overarching context that can influence an interaction.

Any number of contextual cues can influence communication. For example, the time and place of the

interaction are both important considerations. Does the interaction occur at night or during the day?

Does the interaction take place face-to-face or via a mediated technology such as Skype? In addition, the

cultures of each communicator, as well as the culture in which the interaction is taking place, are often

consciously and subconsciously taken into account. Culture, which we will discuss in more depth in

Chapter 3, involves the traditions, beliefs, and standards for behaviors that are passed down from one

generation to the next.

Our psychological state also affects our communication. When we are unhappy, we perceive situations

differently from how they seem to us if we are in a good mood. For example, you might have a better

time at a birthday party right after receiving an excellent grade in a course than you might after

receiving a poor grade. In addition, the social situation, the participants in the interaction, and their

relational history influence communication and each person's interpretation of it.

As you have learned, communication occurs in a particular context, which includes the time, place, and

people involved in the interaction. (We discuss context further later in this chapter.) All of these

contextual aspects fit into the larger context of culture. Overall, it is important to recognize that the

context often significantly shapes communication in a particular setting.

1.2 Two Models of Communication In the field of interpersonal communication, communication theories and models evolved from basic,

preliminary foundations laid by early scholars. Communication as an academic discipline has both a long

and a short history. The broad study of communication is rooted in the traditions of Socrates, Plato,

Aristotle, and the philosophy of ancient Greece. Specifically, the art of persuasion, known as rhetoric,

emerged to promote citizen participation in democracy during this time. Rhetoric remains an important

area of communication study today. In contrast, the modern study of communication, and the

emergence of the subfield of interpersonal communication in particular, only began in the twentieth

century. In the first four decades of that century, various aspects of communication were studied as

speech and oratory at American universities but in different social science and humanities departments

such as anthropology, English, political science, and sociology. From 1940 to the mid-1960s, the study of

communication started to evolve into a distinct communication discipline. This consolidation was

partially due to World War II, which generated an interest in the creation, understanding, and successful

implementation of propaganda messages during wartime.

It was also in the 1960s that the study of interpersonal communication "came into its own as an

identifiable academic discipline" (Bryant & Pribanic-Smith, 2010, p. 26). The early focus of this discipline

was persuasion, influence, group communication, but there was also a growing interest during the

1970s in how cognition is related to interpersonal interaction. The study of interpersonal

communication continued to advance in size and influence between the 1970s and 1980s, with

substantial growth in university courses and the founding of professional associations and journals

focused on interpersonal communication (Bryant & Pribanic-Smith, 2010). The field of interpersonal

communication continues to grow and evolve with the ever-changing nature of social interactions

thanks to the popularity of social networking and technological conduits developed for interpersonal

communication, such as text messaging and video conferencing.

Since the 1940s, when the study of communication split from other academic disciplines,

communication scholars proposed their own models and theories to explain communication

interactions. Theories are claims and beliefs researchers develop and then test in controlled studies or

in real-world situations. When communication scholars create and test theories, they provide useful

information about the communication process that is based on research and evidence. Such practices

also help advance communication as a unique academic discipline. Researchers also create physical

models to illustrate communication concepts and theories. Models are simple representations, in an

ideal form, of a process or an object. Although models provide a simplified view of something that is

typically much more complex, they are useful because they clarify the nature of a phenomenon or a

process. A model also highlights or emphasizes the elements a scholar believes are particularly

important and allows us to examine how an element is related to other parts of the model. Theories and

models are important tools to illustrate the researcher's systematic thinking about that particular topic.

With new research findings in interpersonal communication, researchers expanded upon the discipline's

preliminary models and theories. To illustrate the evolution of these communication models, we will

discuss two general types of communication models: (1) the linear model and (2) the transaction model.

The transaction model builds on the linear model and, based on research findings, adds new insights to

our knowledge of the communication process. Let's examine these models and discuss how they differ.

A Closer Look at the Elements of Communication

The Linear Model of Communication In 1948 Bell Telephone Company engineer and mathematician Claude Shannon was assigned the task of

determining the most efficient way to transmit electrical signals from one location to another. As a

result, Shannon developed one of the most influential early linear models of communication. He called

his model the Mathematical Theory of Communication, and it was originally published in The Bell System

Technical Journal. Shannon later worked with mathematician Warren Weaver to create a description of

this communication model that was accessible to the general public, in what is known today as the

Shannon and Weaver model of communication (see Figure 1.1). There are a number of linear models

that were developed at this time, but the Shannon and Weaver model is the most significant.

Figure 1.1: The Shannon-Weaver model of communication

The linear model of communication, developed by Shannon and Weaver, was originally created to

represent mechanical communication, but this model is still the first to visually depict the

communication process.

Source: Shannon, C. E. (1948, July–October). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System

Technical Journal, 27, 379–423. © John Wiley & Sons.

Shannon postulated that all communication could be broken down into three components: an

information source, a channel or path, and a destination (Weaver & Shannon, 1963). In this model, the

information source is the sender, who has a message to transmit. This message is transformed into a

signal, which travels along a channel, where it is delivered. The transmitter and receiver shown in the

Shannon and Weaver model were devices such as telephone handsets that sent and received the

information signal. The Shannon and Weaver model focused on the mechanism of transmitting electrical

signals, not on the content of the information or the message. Because it focused on the mechanical and

technical issues involved in message transmission, the model did not explain the complexities of human

communication. Nevertheless, Shannon's ingenuity made two important contributions to the field of

communication.

First, Shannon defined and quantified the sometimes imprecise notion of information, which is defined

as stimuli from individuals' surroundings that contribute to their beliefs and knowledge (Brashers,

Goldsmith, & Hsieh, 2002). He believed that telephone signals, radio waves, photographs, film, and

other media could all be considered information, and this information could be encoded in binary digits,

or bits, which would enable relay circuits to perform complex mathematical operations and to transmit

this digital information without error. Almost 50 years elapsed before Shannon's information concept

had practical application, but today this concept forms the operational basis used for computers and

other electronic devices, making items such as CDs, DVDs, and broadband communication possible. In

fact, Shannon is now referred to as the father of information technology and is credited with single-

handedly creating today's digital revolution (Waldrop, 2001).

Second, the Shannon and Weaver linear communication model introduced the idea of noise into the

communication process. Shannon defined noise as anything that interferes with, corrupts, or changes

the communication signal as it travels through a channel. Again, Shannon primarily focused on technical

noise in the signal transmission, such as static on a telephone line. But he recognized that

communicators could experience semantic noise, which occurs when messages are misunderstood or

misinterpreted or when interference arises because of the language used by one or more of the

communication participants. We will return to the concept of noise in the next section where we

describe the elements of communication.

Though Shannon originally developed his model of communication for mechanical communication, this

early linear model was the first attempt to visually depict the communication process. In the linear

model, the sender of the message is the primary and only active participant in the communication

process. The sender is responsible for clearly and accurately communicating to the receiver, who

passively accepts whatever message the sender transmits. If the communicated message fails to

produce shared meaning or desired results, then researchers will simply examine how the sender

formed the message or will develop methods for improving message transmission. If we use the linear

model to analyze Kim and Pat's conversation about what to have for dinner, we might assume Kim is

responsible for clear communication, and she is at fault when Pat does not know that she is available to

have dinner with him. We might suggest that Kim's question, "What are we doing for dinner tonight?"

should be more explicit or clearer, such as, "I'm available for dinner with you tonight after all—do you

want to do something?"

In the 1950s and early 1960s, researchers adapted the Shannon and Weaver model and applied its

concepts to the process of human communication. Several scholars during this time made significant

contributions to our knowledge of interpersonal communication. One model in particular affects our

understanding of interpersonal communication today.

The Transaction Model of Communication As communication established a distinct discipline, researchers recognized that communication was not

inherently linear and that both sender and receiver were influential, active participants in the

communication process. As a result, researchers developed the interaction model of communication.

The interaction model depicted the sender and the receiver, as the linear model of communication

does, but also emphasized the participants' sequential turns when they exchanged messages with one

another.

As the study of communication progressed, researchers recognized it was not necessary to receive a

message before sending a message. Communicators could send and receive messages at the same time

and had mutual influence during the interaction. For example, while one person was speaking, a second

person could smile or frown and thus send a nonverbal message. The two participants in the interaction

are both simultaneously a sender and a receiver of messages. Instead of comparing communication to

shooting an arrow, as in the linear model, or hitting a tennis ball back and forth, as in the interaction

model, communication is more like a dance. Researchers acknowledged that participants would rely on

each other's cues and that their combined movements influenced the direction of their interaction. This

interplay between the communicators is known as a transaction, and these later models of

communication are known as transaction models.

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

communication process:

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

 Information flows in both directions.

 There are both verbal and nonverbal messages.

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

The sender and the receiver are mutually responsible for the creation of meaning. The two parties must

negotiate to achieve as much shared meaning as possible. Elements of the transaction model—

feedback, context, and noise, among others—are detailed here. Each of these can influence shared

meaning between the parties.

Sender and Receiver Though senders and receivers are addressed as separate elements of communication, each party in an

interaction should be considered both a sender and a receiver, or simply, a communicator. The sender is

the source of the communication—the person who initiates the interaction. The receiver is the recipient

of the message the sender transmits. Early communication models considered the receiver a passive

participant in the communication process, but researchers today believe the receiver is actively engaged

in the communication process. Communication participants are simultaneously a sender and a receiver.

Before communication can occur, the sender must first encode the idea she wants to communicate, or

put the idea into some form or code that the other person can understand. In other words, encoding

involves the creation of meaning. Language is a type of verbal communication code. Nonverbal

communications, such as gestures, eye contact, and touch, are codes as well. If the other person does

not understand the message, she will not be able to decode or interpret the message in the way that

the sender intends. For example, placing the thumb and forefinger together to form a circle is a

nonverbal code that can mean "OK" in the United States. However, the same gesture is interpreted

differently in Brazil and Germany and is considered an offensive gesture equivalent to the U.S. gesture

of showing someone the middle finger (Hayden, 2007).

Message In the communication process, the message is the content of the communication itself—the idea the

sender wishes to communicate to the receiver. Messages are

 Perceived via one or more of our five senses (sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell)

 Planned, unintentional, or somewhere in between

 Communicated via both verbal and nonverbal codes

Stockbyte/Thinkstock

We can use both verbal and nonverbal codes to communicate a message.

Messages are only understood if the idea is encoded by the sender and decoded by the receiver in a

similar manner, and if shared meaning is achieved.

According to influential scholars of interpersonal communication, messages also contain both content

and relational dimensions (Watzlawick, Beavin, & Jackson, 1967). The content dimension of the message

is the information the sender wants to communicate to the receiver. The relational dimension of the

message is the complex relationship between the two communicators. The nature of the relationship

can include factors such as who has more or less power or status, how much communicators like or

dislike each other, and the feelings one or both communicators experience during the interaction.

Typically, the content dimension is shared through verbal communication, and the relational dimension

is expressed via nonverbal communication.

When compared with the content dimension of a message, the relational dimension is often less clear or

ambiguous and may require verbal verification. For example, if your boss says, "I'd like to see you in my

office," the content of the message is clear and simple. However, the relational dimension may cause

you to feel concern. Maybe you analyze your boss's tone of voice or facial expressions. Perhaps you

mentally review your recent work and interactions with your boss to predict if the meeting will be a

positive or a negative experience. As you can see from this example, verbal and nonverbal messages and

the content and relational dimensions of messages all affect message encoding and decoding.

Channel The channel is the medium or the means through which the message is transmitted from sender to

receiver. Multiple channels can be employed in an interaction. For example, when two people talk face-

to-face, they use the auditory channel when they speak and listen, the visual channel when they observe

each other's gestures and facial expressions, and the tactile channel when there is physical contact. In

addition, the channel could be mediated in some way, which means that someone or something is

intervening between the sender and the receiver in the communication process. For example, the

cellular network and airwaves constitute a communication channel for someone on a cell phone; the

Internet network would be a channel for someone sending an e-mail. When communication occurs via

these mediated channels, other channel options are often limited. For example, mediated channels

would easily support the visual and auditory channels described above, but make tactile (touch) or

olfactory (scent) channels much more difficult or even impossible to use.

Feedback As previously stated in this chapter, shared meaning is the goal of communication. For communication

to be effective, the message must have the same or similar meaning—a shared understanding—for both

communicators. We cannot be sure if the message that is sent is the same as the message that is

received until we assess the feedback, one of the many elements of the communication process.

Feedback is defined as any information a communicator gets from others in response to a message.

Feedback can be verbal or nonverbal and often includes elements of both. For example, if you tell a child

his lunch is ready, he might race into the house (nonverbal) and shout "hooray" (verbal), and both

elements are forms of feedback. Feedback is an important component in the communication process

because it is the method we use to gauge the success of the communication. Feedback also provides the

opportunity to alter our messages and to try to communicate again if the previous message is not

understood or if shared understanding is not achieved.

Noise Every day we are presented with countless messages and sensory experiences, from signs and

advertisements to interactions with strangers. If these messages or sensations distract us from fully

participating in an interaction, they are classified as noise. Recall that noise was first discussed in

relation to Shannon and Weaver's linear model of communication, though Shannon's primary view of

noise was technological in nature. Communication scholars have since determined there are four

specific types of noise that can interfere with or garble a particular message:

 Physical noise includes distractions that originate from the environment rather than from the

communicators—such as a ringing or vibrating cell phone, the hum of traffic outside your

window, other students talking during class, or even pop-up advertisements on your computer

screen. Physical noise is thus an external form of noise.

 Psychological noise occurs when one or both communicators' cognitions or mental states

interfere with shared meaning. Biases, prejudices, stereotypes, and even extreme emotions

such as rage are all examples of psychological noise. Psychological noise is thus an internal form

of noise and is most likely to occur when a communicator has extreme views or even a

viewpoint on the opposite end of the spectrum.

 Physiological noise occurs when one or both communicators have an impairment that restricts

shared understanding. Examples of physiological impairment include visual or speech

impairments, difficulty with or loss of hearing, and memory loss. An inability to understand

someone's regional or cultural accent is also a type of physiological noise, even if both

communicators speak the same language.

 Semantic noise occurs when one or both communicators assign different meanings to a

message. One common example of semantic noise involves communicators who speak different

languages—for example, one individual only speaks English, and the other only understands

Spanish. Other examples can include misinterpretations of a nonverbal signal, such as the

different interpretations of the "OK" hand gesture previously discussed. Use of complex terms

or jargon can also create semantic noise, but even speech that is too vague or ambiguous can

lead to semantic noise due to misinterpretation. On the television show Seinfeld, for example,

George Costanza's girlfriend continuously uses the phrase "yadda, yadda, yadda," and George

could not understand her because she frequently glossed over important points of the story.

Any or all of these forms of noise can be present in an interaction. Obviously, the more noise that there

is during an interaction, the more difficulty the communicators will have focusing on the messages that

they are exchanging and on creating shared meaning. Though we cannot fully eliminate noise from our

interactions with others, knowing that noise can affect our communication can help us anticipate and

deal with it.

Context The transaction model acknowledges that communication does not take place in a vacuum; rather, a

simple shift in where or when an interaction takes place can significantly alter it. As defined earlier in

the chapter, context is the circumstances in which an interaction occurs, and it surrounds and infuses

the interaction and affects the communicators' messages. A number of contextual aspects—including

time, place, environment, the psychological dimension of each communicator, and culture—can each

play an integral role in shaping or changing the messages that are being shared.

Together, these elements combine to illustrate the process of communication as depicted by the

transaction model of communication. For example, Kim and Pat are both senders and receivers in their

interaction. Their messages are the things that they say both verbally and nonverbally to each other,

and they used both mediated (e-mail and mobile phone texts and calls) and face-to-face channels to

communicate these messages. When Kim said to Pat, "Fine, whatever," she is providing him with

feedback that indicates she is not being considerate of or taking seriously the message Pat has sent.

Taking the analysis one step farther, there could be multiple types of noise present, including physical

noise in the form of distractions at work and while on the road, and even psychological noise as both

Kim and Pat became more angry and frustrated. Finally, the scenario context could involve the time of

day—that it was close to dinnertime—and how each felt about the other and the relationship that they

share. The transaction model thus is useful because it not only describes each of these elements but

helps us identify the role of each element in a given interaction.

The Transaction Model of Communication

1.3 What Is Interpersonal Communication? This text focuses on interpersonal communication: the building block for all other types of

communication. Interpersonal communication (IPC) is a unique type of communication that involves

two individuals interacting via face-to-face or mediated channels. This communication involves the

smallest number of communicators—two, also known as a dyad. It can be unplanned, such as when

people unexpectedly meet, exchange greetings, and have an impromptu conversation. It can also be

planned, such as when two people arrange to sit down for coffee at a certain time and place to talk

about a problem. Interpersonal communication can take place in an informal setting—a home, a yard, or

a supermarket, for instance. Interpersonal communication can also occur in a formal setting, such as an

employer's office or a classroom. Interpersonal communication can even take place via mediated

channels like telephones, computers, or video cameras.

Aspects of a typical interaction can be both planned and unplanned, both formal and informal. For

example, the doctor–patient encounter would likely be considered a primarily formal and planned

interaction. However, this interaction also can include informal greetings and chitchat when the doctor

first enters the examination room. If the patient provides information about his symptoms during the

exam that the doctor did not anticipate, unplanned communication will occur. If the patient follows up

later with the doctor via e-mail, the interaction will span both face-to-face and mediated channels. As

this example illustrates, the study of interpersonal communication is important because such

interactions are complex, multilayered, and can reveal a lot about the communication process.

Functions of Interpersonal Communication As social animals, we want and need connections with other people. We communicate to accomplish

any number of mutual goals, and to relate to one another. Specifically, interpersonal communication is a

social process, and we usually communicate for one of three primary purposes: (1) to meet personal

needs; (2) to learn about ourselves, other people, and the world; and (3) to build and maintain

relationships with others.

Meeting Personal Needs One of the most basic reasons people interact with others is to satisfy personal needs. In 1943,

psychologist Abraham Maslow developed a theory of human motivation, proposing that all humans

have an essential nature and a set of basic human needs that motivate us to seek psychological health

and full humanness, or self-actualization (Maslow, 1968). People have basic needs that must be met

before they can move toward self-actualization. Essential needs such as safety and food must be

satisfied before we can continue the process of self-actualization (Maslow, 1968). Like empty holes,

deficiencies must be filled, and other people, through interpersonal communication and interactions,

can help us satisfy these different personal needs ("Maslow's hierarchy," 2009).

The hierarchy of human needs that Maslow identified is usually represented in a pyramid. As the arrow

in Figure 1.2 indicates, Maslow theorized that human needs emerge in order starting from the bottom

of the pyramid. Lower-level needs must be satisfied first, and higher-level needs only arise once the

basic needs are realized. Basic physiological needs, the necessities for life such as food, water, and

shelter, are the strongest needs. Maslow believed the first reason to communicate is for survival.

Communication enables us to call attention to ourselves, to warn others of danger, and to exchange

critical information to meet these physiological needs. Then we can turn our attention to the need for

safety and security. We may have enough food to eat today, but we also need to feel secure that we will

have food, water, and shelter tomorrow and the day after as well. Once these safety needs are met, we

can then address social needs. The most basic social need is the need to belong. Friendship, acceptance

by others, and the ability to both give and receive love are powerful needs for all humans, and they

drive much of our interpersonal communication. After we satisfy these needs, we are then motivated to

fulfill esteem needs, such as the need for recognition, the pride of accomplishment, and the satisfaction

of self-respect.

Figure 1.2: Maslow's hierarchy of needs

Basic needs, those closer to the bottom of the pyramid, must be met before one is in the position to

seek out self-actualization.

Source: Maslow, A. H., Frager, R. D., & Fadiman, J. (1987). Motivation and personality (3rd. ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. ©1987. Printed and electronically reproduced by permission of

Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

Self-actualization is at the top of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. A self-actualized individual is far less

dependent on others and is more autonomous and self-directed. This person is able to pursue dreams,

desires, and goals and to strive to reach full potential as a person because she is less needy of praise and

affection and less anxious for honors, prestige, and rewards. This drive for self-actualization is only

activated, however, when lower-level needs are met. Maslow theorized that only a small percentage of

people reach a level of self-actualization, fully using their talents, capacities, and potential. But he also

believed the motivation for self-actualization rarely disappears. Even if full potential is attained, the

motivation to seek self-actualization will persist because there are always more things to learn and new

ways to grow (Maslow, 1968).

Learning about Self and Others In addition to interacting with other people to meet personal needs, another primary function of

interpersonal communication is to learn about oneself, other people, and the world. It helps us develop

a concept of ourselves. Researchers believe that self-concept is a complex mix of how we see ourselves,

what others have told us about ourselves, and what society says we should be. This concept of self is

learned and refined through interpersonal communication and can change throughout life. Chapter 2

further discusses how we develop this concept of self and carry it into communication with others. What

people say to us and about us to others contributes to our concept of self, but we are free to accept or

reject these judgments.

Communication is also one of the most important ways that societies maintain and pass on knowledge

about their society and culture. All societies communicate the history, traditions, and values of their

culture through oral communication. The roots of oral communication reach as far back in human

history as scholars can trace, and more recently written language has been used to communicate from

generation to generation. When we communicate with others, we learn about what is important in their

culture, and we also learn about our own cultural heritage. Think about a recent time when you visited

another culture—it could have been a foreign country, a different region of the United States, or even a

group or association with interests that differ from yours. You may have tried to learn about this

different culture before your visit, possibly by reading books, checking on websites, and asking friends

who are members of or have previously visited that culture. When immersed in that culture, you likely

were highly engaged and observant: You more carefully observed your and others' nonverbal behaviors,

as well as elements of the environment that could give you better insight into your immediate

surroundings and how they reflect that culture.

Building and Maintaining Relationships A final important function of interpersonal communication is to help build and maintain relationships

with other people. Because humans are social animals, we form a variety of relationships, and we often

band together into larger groups to offer one another the protection and strength of numbers and to

pool our talents to help one another. Our ancestors employed this interpersonal communication

function for survival. In fact, psychologist and cognitive neuroscientist Merlin Donald (1991) argued that

Homo erectus was a unique species because they were the first hunter-gatherers and were no longer

living in isolation from one another. Their society, even in the absence of language, was one "where

cooperation and social coordination of action were central to the species survival strategy" (Donald,

1991, pp. 149–150).

You probably have a variety of relationships and group memberships that you believe are central to who

you are, including the relationships with your family of origin and the family and friendships that you

form as an adult. Interpersonal communication is an integral component of building and maintaining

these relationships; quite simply, a close relationship cannot begin or continue to exist without

interpersonal communication. Interpersonal communication helps us meet needs for belonging and for

acceptance and enables us to share values and principles, which are the foundation of human society.

Challenges of Interpersonal Communication Along with the many beneficial functions of interpersonal communication come a number of challenges.

These interpersonal challenges occur frequently, and their presence increases the chance that the

communicators will be unable to share meaning with one another.

Misperceptions The most frequent and broadest challenge of interpersonal communication is misperception. As this

chapter has illustrated, there are many factors that can cause misperceptions. For example, noise

present during the interaction may contribute to misperceptions, or the receiver may not decode the

message the way the sender intended. Kim and Pat's interaction clearly illustrates misperceptions: Kim

believed Pat was ignoring her when he did not respond to her text right away, but Pat was merely

driving and unable to reply. As a result of this misperception, conflict occurs. Certainly, a conflict about

what to do for dinner is not likely to end Kim and Pat's relationship, but if the couple continually

experience similar misperceptions in their interactions, it is likely that their relationship will suffer, and

possibly even come to an end.

Misperceptions can also have serious consequences in medical interactions. One study found that

primary care physicians who took the time to educate their patients about what to expect during the

appointment and checked to make sure that the patients understood what they said were less often

named in malpractice claims than physicians who did not strive to reduce misperceptions in these ways

(Levinson, Roter, Mullooly, Dull, & Frankel, 1997). With so many elements in motion and sometimes in

conflict with each other during a given interaction, it is amazing that communicators ever are able to

share meaning with one another!

Long-Distance Relationships Technological and transportation advances now give us the option to live almost anywhere, and we are

also more likely to move multiple times to different homes, cities, and even countries during our lives

(Zechner, 2008). One side effect of this increased mobility is the growth of the long-distance

relationship (LDR), where "communication opportunities are restricted (in the view of the individuals

involved) because of geographic parameters and the individuals within the relationship have

expectations of a continued close connection" (Stafford, 2005, p. 7). Long-distant relationships can take

many forms, including romantic, friendship, or familial, and individuals can play a variety of roles in

these LDRs, such as providing social support, resources, and care (Bevan & Sparks, 2011). You likely are

in at least one long-distance relationship right now because of school, a job, the military, or even

because you moved to be with a spouse or closer to your elderly parents.

According to Erin Sahlstein (2006), although LDRs have similarities with geographically close

relationships, long-distance partners encounter a unique set of challenges. A communication scholar

and expert in the study of long-distance relationships, Sahlstein (2006) notes that individuals in long-

distance relationships may encounter the following challenges, which can affect relationship

maintenance:

 Unforeseen time, cost, and convenience issues

 Tension and stress management issues

 Belated information sharing

 Limited opportunities to provide comfort, reassurance, and support

 Fewer interactions, in terms of both quantity and quality

 Difficulties assisting with individual and relationship crises

However, Sahlstein's (2004) research also emphasizes that distance in LDRs can create unique

perspectives; partners in these relationships spend time both together and apart, and they recognize

there are both positive and negative aspects associated with each of these interdependent relational

states. For example, there is pressure for distant partners to find time to spend together, but distant

partners also feel appreciation for each other and relationship rejuvenation and renewal when they do

reunite (Sahlstein, 2004). New technologies and transportation options that increase the likelihood of

being in an LDR also provide abundant options for distant partners to connect and reconnect. Thus, LDRs

can be considered both a challenge and an opportunity (we will take another look at LDRs in Chapter 8).

Increase in Intergenerational Relationships

David Sacks/Photodisc/Thinkstock

Intergenerational communication occurs when communicators in an interaction are members of

different generations.

Mary Lee Hummert (2012) proposes that "age is one of the most salient, and perhaps automatic, ways

of categorizing ourselves as well as others" (p. 223). This is especially the case in intergenerational

interactions, which occur when members of different generations communicate with one another.

Members of a particular generation, such as Baby Boomers or Gen Xers, experience similar social trends,

historical events, political and social occurrences, and technological advances that shape their individual

perspectives and views about the world (Myers & Davis, 2012). Members of different generations who

interact with one another are likely to approach the same situation or event in very different ways,

creating an intergenerational communication challenge (Myers & Davis, 2012). Hummert (2012)

presents three associations between life stage or age and communication that may also prompt

intergenerational communication problems:

 Developmental stages of particular age groups can affect how members prefer to communicate

and influence their actual communication practices.

 Age groups or generations are often characterized by differences in economic resources and

status, resulting in intergenerational conflict.

 Age-related beliefs or stereotypes can negatively influence if and how members of different

generations interact with one another.

There are, however, a number of other reasons why there are more opportunities for intergenerational

interactions. Increased life expectancy, advances in medical testing and treatment options, and even the

growing use of social network sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram all increase the probability

that we will communicate with someone from a different generation. In 2012, for example, 53% of

Americans age 65 and older reported that they went online to use the Internet and e-mail, and 30% of

these seniors were also members of at least one social networking site (Zickuhr & Madden, 2012).

Emerging studies also reveal that online intergenerational interactions can create constructive

connections. Researchers have found that having a parent on Facebook actually decreased parent–child

conflict for college students (Kanter, Afifi, & Robbins, 2012). Overall, intergenerational communication

can sometimes be dissatisfying but can also be warm and respectful (Hummert, 2012). Whether the

interactions are positive or negative, such communication experiences can certainly provide new and

different insights about the world around us.

Benefits of Studying Interpersonal Communication Though most of us are born with the ability to communicate, humans still have much to learn about

communication, and everyone can benefit from systematically studying interpersonal communication.

What are some specific benefits of an increased scholarly understanding of communication between

two people? The field of communication research is broad and continues to evolve as communication

itself adapts to new interactions. Further study, for example, can increase our understandings about our

relationships or our health. We next discuss some specific reasons for the importance of studying

interpersonal communication.

Understanding the Difficulty in Forming and Maintaining Interpersonal Relationships A better understanding of interpersonal communication can improve how we relate to others in

interpersonal relationships. Though it seems logical and natural for us to form and maintain

interpersonal relationships, many of us have trouble doing both. For example, Americans reported

having one-third fewer confidants in 2004 than in 1985; this is a decrease from approximately three to

two confidants (McPherson, Smith-Lovin, & Brashears, 2006). In addition, even though we are

surrounded by others every day (via both mediated and face-to-face channels), many individuals

experience chronic loneliness, which is defined as an ongoing, bothersome experience that occurs when

an individual's social network is viewed as somehow deficient; in other words, a person has fewer

relationships than she desires (Peplau & Perlman, 1982; Perlman & Peplau, 1981). One study that traced

participants over seven years found that one-third of these Dutch adults and 40–50% of the elderly

experienced loneliness at moderate to severe levels (Dykstra, van Tilburg, & de Jong Gierveld, 2005). A

different study determined that U.S. college students reported having high-to-moderate levels of

chronic loneliness (Wang, Fink, & Cai, 2008). These findings suggest that individuals have fewer people

they can depend upon and that many adults consistently struggle with loneliness.

Individuals have similar difficulties maintaining their relationships. The U.S. divorce rate, which is one of

the highest of all industrialized nations, is a major indicator of this struggle (Mullins, Brackett, McKenzie,

& Djamba, 2012). According to the National Center for Health Statistics (Goodwin, Mosher, & Chandra,

2010), 35% of first marriages will end in separation or divorce within 10 years. Paul Amato (2010) notes

that 43–46% of all U.S. marriages were predicted to end in divorce at the conclusion of the twentieth

century. An emerging trend since the mid-1990s is the notable jump in divorces among older age

groups, also referred to as gray divorces (Kreider & Ellis, 2009): Americans age 50 and over were twice

as likely to divorce in 2010 as they were just 20 years earlier (Brown & Lin, 2012). Nearly all of the

interpersonal predictors of divorce in Amato's (2010) review of divorce research also reflect difficulty

with interpersonal communication between spouses. Such difficulties include

 Domestic violence behaviors

 Acts of infidelity

 The frequency of conflict

 The perception that there are numerous relational issues between the spouses

Many of the recent gray divorces are remarriages, which the researchers note are often burdened by

communication issues such as stepchildren relationships, money and wills, and healthcare issues and

decisions (Brown & Lin, 2012).

Researchers can also identify the impact of interpersonal communication on relationship maintenance if

they can define the specific reasons why couples enter into marital therapy. For example, one study

found that problematic communication was the most frequent reason spouses reported entering into

couples therapy (Doss, Simpson, & Christensen, 2004). Another study found that marital therapists

ranked communication as the third most significant problem area for the couples that they see in

therapy (Whisman, Dixon, & Johnson, 1997). These findings emphasize not only the complexity of

maintaining relationships, specifically romantic relationships, but also serve as important justifications

for further studies about the role of interpersonal communication in relationships. We will return to

many of these issues—including relationship maintenance, infidelity, conflict, and relationship

deterioration and termination—later in the text.

Understanding Links to Physical and Mental Health Interpersonal communication issues affect a relationship's health, as we have just discussed, but some

issues are also related to physical and mental health components. Both destructive and constructive

interpersonal communication messages are connected with physical and mental health. Constructive

communication involves positive, beneficial messages such as showing that you are supportive, listening

to your partner, and being open and willing to share your thoughts and feelings. Destructive

communication, on the other hand, is comprised of negative and harmful messages that include

hostility, insults, and shouting or yelling. For example, greater levels of communication apprehension

and topic avoidance during discussions with a close relational partner are examples of destructive

communications related to greater severity of irritable bowel syndrome symptoms (Bevan, 2009).

The greatest amount of research on destructive communication and health, however, focuses on

behaviors during conflicts. Specifically, across studies, the use of competitive or hostile messages in

interpersonal conflicts is consistently linked to compromised functions in the cardiovascular, endocrine,

and immune systems (Canary & Lakey, 2012; Robles & Kiecolt-Glaser, 2003). This relationship between

hostile messages and health also includes nonverbal communication. For example, husbands' negative

facial expressions during conflicts are associated with wives' physical illness symptoms (Gottman,

Levenson, & Woodin, 2001). But conflict avoidance can also be harmful. A 17-year study of 192 married

couples considered the effects of different conflict management styles and found that when both

spouses suppressed their anger, mortality was twice as likely than when one or both spouses expressed

their anger to one another (Harburg, Kaciroti, Gleiberman, Julius, & Schork, 2008).

In contrast, two constructive messages that are beneficial to one's health are affectionate behaviors and

social support. Kory Floyd's body of research (Floyd, 2002; Floyd & Riforgiate, 2008) tested his affection

exchange theory and consistently found that giving and receiving affectionate messages is an important

method for reducing individuals' physiological stress. Touch as a form of affectionate behavior can also

reduce anxiety during surgery (Moon & Cho, 2001). In addition, a statistical review of 81 studies on

social support and health found that the presence of social support in one's life contributed to increased

cardiovascular, endocrine, and immune system functioning (Uchino, Cacioppo, & Kiecolt-Glaser, 1996).

Social support also increases the likelihood that patients will adhere to their prescribed medical

treatment regimens (DiMatteo, 2004). Overall, a study that examined patterns of findings in previous

research (called a meta-analysis) determined that those with adequate interpersonal relationships have

a 50% higher likelihood of survival compared to those whose relationships are poor (Holt-Lunstad,

Smith, & Layton, 2010). This interpersonal relationship effect is as significant as quitting smoking and

has more of an impact than other risk factors such as lack of exercise and obesity (Holt-Lunstad et al.,

2010).

These are just a few of the hundreds of studies that found a significant link between communication and

health. There are numerous ways that communication and relationship quality are associated with

health, and the potential physiological benefits of interpersonal communication further emphasizes the

importance of continued study (see the Web Field Trip feature for more on the importance of

interpersonal communication to mental health).

WEB FIELD TRIP

Making Interpersonal Connections

Mental Health America (http://www.mentalhealthamerica.net/) is an organization that aims to help

community members achieve overall wellness by focusing on the importance of mental health. The

organization's Live Your Life Well campaign, which you can access via the website's Living Well

dropdown menu, suggests 10 tools that you can use to achieve mental wellness. Take a moment to

review each of the ten tools, and then consider the questions below.

Critical Thinking Questions

4. According to Mental Health America, connecting with others is the top tool for living life well.

How might our connections with others affect our individual health and overall well-being?

5. How might you apply some of the suggested relationship tips to your own interpersonal

situations?

Understanding the Constant Evolution of Interpersonal Communication Our methods of communication rapidly and constantly change, now more than ever before.

Interpersonal communication was once limited to face-to-face or written formats such as letters, which

often took weeks or months to arrive at their destination. The invention and adoption of the telegraph

in the mid-1800s first allowed individuals to efficiently communicate over great distances. But it is only

in the last 30 years that how we communicate with one another has substantially shifted and expanded.

This shift started with the widespread adoption of the Internet and e-mail, ramped up with the

proliferation of mobile telephones, text messaging, and the development of social networking sites such

as MySpace and Facebook, and continues today with the expansion of video conferencing services such

as Skype and FaceTime and sites such as Twitter and Instagram. With one mouse click or one screen tap,

we can friend, unfriend, or tweet an individual online and alter our interpersonal relationships. But the

increased incidence of cyberbullying also reveals the dark side of such online interactions.

Researchers have accordingly responded to these rapid changes in communication. There has been an

explosion in the number of studies that examine how mobile phones and social networking impact how

we relate to one another in just the last five years. For example, U.S. teens now use cell phones to text

message more than any other means of communication (including face-to-face), and text messaging by

teens increased from 51% in 2006 to 72% in 2010 (Lenhart, Ling, Campbell, & Purcell, 2010). In addition,

though romantic partners use cell phones significantly more than any other form of mediated

communication to interact with each other, use of text messaging most strongly influences couples'

communication and their satisfaction with their relationship (Coyne, Stockdale, Busby, Iverson, & Grant,

2011). To fully understand the nature of interpersonal communication, we must consider its continual

evolution. Each chapter in this text includes the feature IPC in the Digital Age, which highlights specific

research into the interesting new ways that we can relate to each other.

IPC IN THE DIGITAL AGE

It's Not Mediated versus Face-to-Face Communication, but Mediated and Face-to-Face Communication

Early studies of online interpersonal interactions focused on one of two objectives: (1) comparing face-

to-face (FtF) and computer-mediated communication (CMC) to determine which is preferred or optimal

in particular contexts or situations, or (2) examining one or more forms of CMC in complete isolation

from FtF interaction. Now, however, there is a new line of research with roots in the communication

department at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. The scholars behind this research argue that

continued separation of FtF and CMC analyses will not accurately reflect current communication styles.

Instead, according to researchers John Caughlin and Liesel Sharabi (2012, 2013), the interaction

between mediated and nonmediated communication is interdependent, or is mutually influenced by

each other, and is a fairly common occurrence. They call this natural alternation between CMC and FtF

the communication interdependence perspective.

This interdependence of mediated and nonmediated communication is a plausible connection

considering that many of our daily conversations do not have a clear beginning or end; rather, they can

recur at different times and in different forms. For example, Kim and Pat's interaction did not take place

as a single event. Kim first e-mailed Pat about their potential dinner plans, they then continued their

interaction via texting and talking on the phone as they both commuted home, transitioning to face-to-

face discussions once Kim arrived.

Caughlin and Sharabi's (2012, 2013) research determined that FtF and CMC communication

simultaneously occur and that there is frequent interdependence and overlap between these two

modes of communication. In addition, the more that romantic partners are able to integrate their

nonmediated and mediated communication, the more their relationships are close and satisfying

(Caughlin & Sharabi, 2012). When romantic partners only discussed certain topics via mediated

channels, relationship closeness and satisfaction declined, but the opposite was true for topics only

discussed FtF—in such cases, both closeness and satisfaction actually increased (Caughlin & Sharabi,

2013). These findings, though preliminary, offer an interesting and accurate representation of the

intricate and multifaceted ways we currently interact with one another. We have different channels

available for exchanging verbal and nonverbal messages, and knowing this will help us determine which

messages work best for the different circumstances we may encounter. Think about the most recent

interaction you had with a romantic partner or a close friend, and then consider the questions below.

Critical Thinking Questions

6. Can you pinpoint when your interaction started—the very first time you discussed a particular

topic with this person?

7. Can you identify the different channels you have since used to continue this conversation—did

you text, e-mail, use the phone, video conference, use social media, talk in person, write a note,

any and/or all of the above?

8. How did shifting between different mediated and nonmediated forms of communication change

the nature of the interaction? Was it easy for you to make the transitions?

1.4 How This Book Will Help You Communicate More Competently The field of interpersonal communication encompasses a large body of information. The primary goals

in this text are to increase your awareness of the principles of interpersonal communication and to

appropriately and effectively apply these principles in everyday interactions. Interpersonal

communication is a lifelong study that requires ongoing practice for everyone. The notion of being both

appropriate and effective in your interactions with others is called communication competence, and we

will return to this term throughout the text to illustrate its utility in a variety of communication

situations.

To be a more competent communicator, be sure to keep the following principles in mind and work to

demonstrate them in your everyday interactions with other people:

 Take responsibility for your communication behavior. Strive to be truthful, accurate, and clear in

your communication with others.

 Remember that communication involves shared meaning. Each person in an interaction—not

just the sender—has an equal responsibility to work toward achieving this mutual

understanding and interpretation.

 Acknowledge that your view of a situation is only one of many views. Try to take the perspective

of other people and consider how their point of view makes sense to them.

 Respect others as well as yourself. Strive for win-win outcomes in communication encounters,

where both parties get their needs met, not outcomes where one person "wins" an argument or

controls a discussion at the expense of the other person's feelings or interests.

 Listen and evaluate the other person's statements before responding. Choose your verbal and

nonverbal messages carefully.

 Practice being a competent communicator. Communication skills are learned through

knowledge, motivation, and the skill that is earned through practice. Each chapter in this text

will provide suggestions that will help you improve your communication competence.

Previous section

Next section

Summary and Resources Human beings are social animals and are born into this world communicating with those around them.

We may think that communication is natural and take it for granted; however, competent

communication is a skill that must be learned and is crucial in both personal and professional life. It

requires awareness of what we (and others) are doing when we communicate, and it requires effort to

improve communication skills and to minimize misunderstandings. Communication is thus defined as a

process where two or more people strive to create shared meaning using nonverbal and verbal

messages in a variety of contexts.

The goal of human communication is to create shared meaning. Because meaning is in people, not in

words, communication skills must be used to reach mutual understanding about what a symbol or word

means. Communication involves interactions with other people that continue throughout life. It is

ongoing and ever changing. The give-and-take of human communication appears to be unique to human

beings, and it takes work to build and maintain the relationships we form with others.

The study of interpersonal communication as an academic discipline began in the mid-twentieth century

and is flourishing today. Researchers continue to learn about the complex subject of interpersonal

communication, adding to our understanding of this subject. Theories and models of communication

that evolved during the first decades of formal study can be divided into two types: (1) the linear model

that envisioned interpersonal communication as one-directional, much like shooting an arrow at a

passive receiver; and (2) transaction models, in which the participants are senders and receivers

simultaneously, similar to a dance in which each person gets cues from the other, and each individual's

moves influence the direction of the communication. The interpersonal communication process consists

of several key elements:

 The sender—the source of the communication

 The receiver—the recipient of the message and an active participant in the communication

process

 The message—the content of the communication, which is transmitted in some type of code

 The channel—the medium through which the communication is transmitted

 Feedback—the response to the communication that a communicator gets from others about the

message

 The communication context—the situation or environment in which the communication takes

place

Noise, information unrelated to the message, can take different forms and can disturb or interrupt the

communication process. Interpersonal communication is a specific type of communication in which two

individuals interact—a dyad—using mediated or face-to-face channels (often both). Interpersonal

communication helps us meet personal needs, including self-actualization. It helps us develop a concept

of self and learn about others, and it is one of the most important ways in which societies pass on their

cultural heritage. Interpersonal communication also helps us build and maintain relationships and

enables us to share values and principles.

Yet interpersonal communication can also be challenging in a number of ways. We can experience

misperceptions and deal with unique difficulties in our long-distance and intergenerational

relationships. Understanding these challenges is one benefit to studying interpersonal communication.

Other benefits to this investigation include further uncovering why it is difficult to form and maintain

interpersonal relationships, understanding how interpersonal communication is related to mental and

physical health, and learning how interpersonal communication is constantly evolving in response to the

rapid growth of technology and mediated communication.

Communication is a complex process, and we will never know everything there is to know about

ourselves and our relationships with others. However, the more we do understand, the better we can

relate to others in our world, the more we can enhance our interpersonal relationships, and the more

competent we can be in our interactions with others.

Chapter 1 Flashcards

Key Terms Click on each key term to see the definition.

channel

communication

communication competence

constructive communication

context

decode

destructive communication

dyad

emoticons

encode

feedback

information

information source

interdependent

interpersonal communication (IPC)

language

long-distance relationship (LDR)

mediated communication

message

models

noise

nonverbal communication

receiver

self-actualization

sender

signal

symbols

theories

transaction

transaction model

verbal communication

Critical Thinking and Discussion Questions  Consider a conversation that you recently had that you felt was successful and another one that

you believe went poorly. Consider the elements of the transaction model of communication:

What are specific differences in these two conversations that resulted in these different

outcomes?

 How can noise interfere with shared meaning in an interaction? Which of the four types of noise

do you think could create the most interference and why?

 Which element of the transaction model of communication do you think is the most important

for creating shared meaning in an interaction and why?

 How is face-to-face communication similar to and different from mediated communication? Use

terms from the chapter to complete your answer.

 To what extent do you believe that your own interpersonal relationships are affected by the

problems or challenges with interpersonal communication discussed in this chapter?

2.1 Communication and the Self-Concept Consider again the exercise presented in the chapter introduction. The contents of this list differ for

every person and represent their unique self-concept. Self-concept can be defined as one's description

or portrayal of him- or herself as a person, "based on an organized collection of beliefs and feelings

about oneself" (Myers, 1993, p. 188). Self-concept is comprised of the qualities that are present in an

individual (Bailey, 2003). The list that you created, which we will refer back to throughout this chapter,

shows that you have several components to your self-concept. These components of "you" are shaped

and altered by aspects of self-concept, including the looking-glass self, social comparisons, culture, and

the self-fulfilling prophecy. Together, these components combine to create who you are and shape your

self-concept over time.

How Self-Concept Is Created Where does your concept of self come from? Most researchers believe that who you think you are is a

complex mix of how you see yourself; how others see you; what parents, teachers, and peers have told

you about yourself that you have recognized and internalized; and what your society or culture tells you

that you are or that you should be. For example, psychologist Michael Argyle (1983) provided a

summary of four key factors that contribute to development of self-concept:

Stockbyte/Thinkstock

The social roles you play and the groups you identify with can contribute to your self-concept.

 The reaction of others

 Your comparison with others

 The social roles you play in society (e.g., I am a mother/father and a teacher so I have to watch

my language and behave in a certain way)

 The groups with which you identify

Your self-concept is learned; it is organized, it is dynamic, and it is changeable over time (Purkey, 1988).

You construct this sense of self through communication with yourself and with others—by what you tell

yourself and what others tell you about yourself. In other words, your self-concept is first externally

imposed by others and then internally incorporated in your thoughts, feelings, actions, and

communication.

When you were born, you had no clear concept of yourself. However, you expressed yourself by

communicating with others through cries and other sounds, through facial expressions, and through

bodily actions such as grabbing a finger that was extended toward you. At some point you realized that

your behavior resulted in responses from others. You cried and received something to eat, or your

diaper was changed. Then your behavior became purposeful: You made that cry or that facial expression

because you had learned that doing so would elicit a response from others. You most likely did not think

through this action and reason "If I cry, I will be fed or changed," but, at a conscious or unconscious

level, you communicated because you wanted to achieve a specific goal. As you matured, your behavior

was more consciously planned to get your needs and desires met.

Throughout life, you have an infinite number of opportunities to express yourself and to interact with

people. These people may express opinions about your behavior by smiling or frowning at you or by

making verbal judgments about your behavior or appearance. "That baby sure cries a lot, doesn't he?"

"You are a very pretty child." "She is stubborn and willful." "He plays well with other children." The

opinions that other people express to you or about you affect you in ways you might not realize. They

influence the way you see yourself, the way you respond to difficulties in life, and the way you interact

with others.

Through your communication with others, with your words and your nonverbal behaviors, you can

influence the perceptions others have of you (Yeung & Martin, 2003). In fact, part of the way you

construct your self-concept is by choosing to accept or reject what other people tell you about yourself.

To grow and learn about yourself, you must be open-minded about other people's opinions. At the same

time, you can also choose to disregard statements that others make about you, if you do not think they

are valid. For example, if someone judges you in a way that you do not accept, try to respond by saying

(to yourself or to someone else), "Thank you for your opinion. That's an interesting story, but it isn't my

story. It is not true for me." How you evaluate your skills and abilities, how you perceive objects and

situations in the world, your values, your vocabulary, and your ability to use language all influence how

you communicate. Though self-concept is an internal process, it is learned, maintained, and can change

through interpersonal communication. Now, let's look more at what contributes to our self-concept.

The Looking-Glass Self Humans are social beings, and in the early twentieth century, American sociologist Charles Horton

Cooley believed that people always see themselves in relation to other people. Your sense of self, he

believed, is formed by imagining how you appear to other people. Cooley used the term looking-glass

self to describe this view of your self-concept, and the looking-glass self is the first way that self-concept

is created. He stated, "Each to each a looking-glass / Reflects the other that doth pass" (Cooley, 1902, p.

152).

Cooley's rhyme suggests that other people are like a looking glass, or a mirror, in which you can view

yourself from others' perspectives. In other words, you are always considering how you look to other

people. You might have a specific person in mind that you want to impress, or you might just have a

general sense of "other people" and how they might judge you. In essence, we treat others' views of us

as clues to who we are. These clues may be accurate or inaccurate, harmful or beneficial, temporary or

enduring, but they should not be automatic. Look back at the "Who am I?" list that you created. How

many of those descriptions are based on how you think others view you? To what degree do these

descriptions reflect how you view yourself?

When you see yourself in a mirror, or think about yourself, you may be pleased or displeased by what

you see, but not simply because it does or does not reflect who you want to be. You also imagine how

other people will judge you. This judgment creates a feeling in you such as pride or embarrassment or

humiliation. For example, in the presence of a person you think is beautiful, you may feel ugly. In the

presence of someone who seems to be less fashionable than you, you may feel sophisticated and in

vogue. According to Cooley (1902), you are most likely to be affected by the judgments of people who

have authority over you such as parents, teachers, and bosses.

You might argue that you, or someone you know, are not affected by what other people think. However,

when you say, "I am not ashamed" or "I don't care about other people's opinions," that does not mean

that you have not considered them. In fact, to come to this decision, you had to make a conscious choice

to disregard the judgment of others. Instead of shame about an action you took, for example, you might

choose an attitude of apathy and not allow yourself to be bothered by the opinion of others, or you

might even feel pride at disobeying the rules of society. However, Cooley (1902) believed that the

thoughts of other people are always there.

Social Comparison According to social psychologist Leon Festinger's (1954) social comparison theory, humans have a

fundamental impulse to evaluate their abilities and opinions. When there is no objective assessment

such as a test or a numerical evaluation available, we rely on social comparisons and evaluate our

abilities and opinions by comparing ourselves to other people. In particular, Festinger's (1954) theory

specifies that this act of social comparison is more likely to occur in relation to a particular group that is

important or central to you in some way, called a reference group. The results of these social

comparisons—whether you conclude that you compare favorably or unfavorably to members of a group

on a particular characteristic—is the second element that contributes to your self-concept. For example,

you may think that you must have certain possessions because others in your reference group have

them, or you must communicate in a certain way to fit in with a group you want to impress.

Comparisons to certain reference groups can explain why teenagers adopt the dress and the slang

expressions of their peers.

Research has consistently found that individuals who compare themselves to images in different forms

of media such as magazine advertisements, television shows, and commercials also feel dissatisfied with

their own bodies (Nabi, 2009). Such findings support Festinger's (1954) social comparison theory. Online

interactions are also a source of social comparison. For example, one research study examined how the

content of others' social networking profiles could impact users' social comparison processes

(Haferkamp & Kramer, 2011). Using fictitious social networking profiles, the researchers found that

users who viewed profile pictures of individuals who were very attractive had a more negative image of

their own bodies than those who viewed unattractive profile photographs. When male participants

viewed profiles of successful male users, they perceived a larger discrepancy between their ideal and

their current career paths compared with men who viewed profiles of less successful males (Haferkamp

& Kramer, 2011). It is thus likely that the size and number of our reference groups will expand as use of

social networking increases, making social comparisons even more significant in shaping self-concept.

Culture At the broadest level, the culture in which we are raised is a third source of self-concept. Culture, as we

discuss in greater detail in Chapter 3, is inherently interrelated with how we communicate. The impact

of culture is reflected in what others—including our parents, authority figures, peer groups, and larger

social structures such as the media and political parties and organizations—tell us about ourselves.

Culture also influences what its members consider socially significant. For example, psychologist Bella

DePaulo (2007) calls American cultural bias against individuals who are not in romantic relationships

"singlism," and this prevailing cultural belief could make individuals who are single feel as if they do not

measure up to those who are in relationships, thus contributing to a more negative self-concept.

Because culture is such a major part of who we are, it can also have an impact on self-concept.

Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Your interpretation of situations, as well as the messages that you use to describe them, can affect your

approach to particular situations and, subsequently, your behavior in these situations. Your experiences

condition you to see the world in a particular way, and such perceptions are difficult to change. Thus, in

a very real way, you create your own reality. You approach communication encounters with certain

expectations and, through your perception and your symbolic use of language, you can create a self-

fulfilling prophecy in which you see what you expect to see and hear what you expect to hear. For

example, when college students enter a conflict interaction expecting that it will be intense, they later

report that it indeed involved a number of intense components, including the use of personal attacks,

and they experienced emotional upset and subsequent interference with their day-to-day activities

(DiPaola, Roloff, & Peters, 2010).

A Closer Look at Self-Concept

Health communication researchers also describe a self-fulfilling prophecy that can occur in doctor–

patient interactions (Perloff, Bonder, Ray, Berlin Ray, & Siminoff, 2006): If a patient believes that the

doctor will not respect him or the questions that he asks, he is likely to make fewer inquiries during an

appointment. The doctor will then think the patient is not motivated or interested in his health and will

provide less information, or information that uses too much confusing medical jargon. The doctor's

response affects the patient's understanding, influences the likelihood that he will follow treatment

recommendations, and confirms his belief that the doctor does not respect him and did not provide the

best treatment. The best method for addressing such self-fulfilling prophecies is to keep in mind that

your expectations about a person or situation should not control how you communicate in an

interaction.

Self-Image Self-concept, as you just learned, refers to your view of yourself in particular situations or with respect

to specific traits. Self-image, on the other hand, is a more general, broad view of yourself; you might say

that it is all the characteristics of your self-concept rolled into one complete picture of yourself.

Psychologist Dennis Coon (1994) defines self-image as "the total subjective perception of oneself,

including an image of one's body and impressions of one's personality, capabilities, and so on" (p. 471).

Your self-image is more permanent than your self-concept; it is the combination of both your internal

view of yourself and the evaluation of others, as well as your physical appearance, and the integration of

your experiences, desires, and feelings (Bailey, 2003). For example, let's say that when you were a child,

you were laughed at when you tried to dance or failed to catch a fly ball in a baseball game. So on the

list of traits that make up your self concept, which you created at the beginning of the chapter, you may

have listed that you are a poor dancer or are a bad baseball player. If you have many negative concepts

such as these, you may form a generally negative self-image of yourself as uncoordinated or unathletic.

James Woodson/Photodisc/Thinkstock

How you think about yourself, at every age, affects your physical, mental, social, emotional, and spiritual

well-being. It can also influence your interactions with others.

Your self-image is formed and transformed, over time, again through your interactions and

communication with other people, as you internalize what you learn about your strengths and

weaknesses. This transformation, however, is very slow and gradual. You continually receive evaluative

messages from others about you and your abilities, and through this information you form a mental

image of your physical appearance, of your successes and failures, of your adequacy, and of your worth.

Self-image tends to be an either-or set of opposites. Either you think you are pretty or you see yourself

as ugly; you are smart or you are dumb. When you have a positive self-image, you appreciate your

assets and your potential, while being realistic about your imperfections and limitations. When you have

a negative self-image, you focus on your faults and weaknesses, distorting failures and imperfections

and minimizing your successes and talents (Cleveland Clinic, 2009). Remember, though, that you can

change your self-image by refusing to accept or believe what others have told you.

Body image is an important part of your self-image. Your body image involves how you think, feel, and

respond to your physical attributes (Cleveland Clinic, 2009). Research on body image is most prevalent

with regard to women; however, men have personal body image issues as well. In recent years,

diagnosed eating disorders among men are on the rise, and steroid and supplement use to improve

appearance or strength has increased dramatically. These issues seem to be associated with men's

preoccupation with their weight, their dissatisfaction with their bodies, poorer attitudes about health,

and also the growth of men's fitness magazines (Tager, Good, & Morrison, 2006).

All societies have ideals for body image of both men and women, and these ideals are reflected in the

judgments of family and peers as well as in art, literature, and the media. Sports Illustrated magazine's

annual swimsuit edition and People magazine's annual "Sexiest Man Alive" list are examples of how

media promote ideals of female and male bodies. Research confirms this relationship: A meta-analysis

found that, across 25 published experiments, the more females are exposed to media messages that

depict a thin body ideal, the lower their satisfaction with their own bodies (Groesz, Levine, & Murnen,

2002).

Plastic surgery and body art such as tattoos are other ways in which some people choose to alter their

bodies in hopes of changing their self-image. Cosmetic surgery, once an activity that people hid from

others, is now performed at elite medical institutions (Elliott, 2004). According to the American Society

of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (2013), Americans underwent over 10 million cosmetic medical procedures

in 2012. Cosmetic procedures, particularly ones that are minimally invasive such as injections and

collagen fillers, also increased 87% from 2000 to 2011 (American Society of Plastic Surgeons, 2012).

Individuals also spent a staggering $11 billion for cosmetic procedures in 2012, striving for a "perfect

look," a figure that includes $6.7 billion for surgeries and $4.3 billion on nonsurgical procedures such as

injections and laser treatments (American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 2013).

Self-image is important because how you think about yourself affects your physical, mental, social,

emotional, and spiritual well-being and how you respond to events in your life. Self-image can also

determine the quality of your relationships because you carry that self-image into all your interpersonal

interactions with others. Weight reduction and plastic surgery can be positive steps to improving your

view of yourself. However, your self-image is not what you look like but what you tell yourself that you

look like. Changing your exterior self also requires internal changes in how you see yourself. Changing

self-image takes time and work. It requires you to think and feel differently about yourself, and it means

you must alter how you respond to your body. People who thought they were fat, for example, and lost

a considerable amount of weight might continue to think of themselves as fat, even if they would no

longer be considered so by others.

Whatever image you now hold about yourself, your self-image is not permanently fixed. Self-image can

even shift in elderly individuals as their circumstances change. In one study of elderly persons who had

recently moved into a retirement home, this change impacted their self-image in three ways: (1) They

felt that their bodies, over which they now had less control compared to when they were younger, had

become less recognizable; (2) they experienced greater physical and psychological fragility and less

freedom to make decisions or come and go as they pleased; and (3) they looked to small events, such as

helping at mealtimes and looking at photographs of family, to provide them with inner strength and

dignity (Franklin, Ternestedt, & Nordenfelt, 2006).

As you age, every stage of your life is thus associated with changes, but you can learn to accept these

changes and to develop a healthy view of yourself. If you have a negative self-image, you can learn to

develop a more accurate view of yourself (Cleveland Clinic, 2009). A positive self-image begins by

accepting and loving yourself and allowing yourself to be accepted and loved by others. The list below

provides some strategies for improving your self-image suggested by a premier medical facility, the

Cleveland Clinic:

 Review your self-concept list.

 Identify negative childhood labels.

 Challenge distorted thinking about yourself.

 Accept and love yourself as you are today.

 Refuse to accept media assumptions about the ideal body appearance.

 Stop comparing yourself to others.

 Define some realistic personal goals and objectives about your self-image.

 Develop your strengths.

 Give yourself positive affirmations.

 Remember that you are unique.

 Learn to laugh and smile at yourself.

 Remember how far you have come. (Cleveland Clinic, 2009)

Self-Esteem Self-esteem consists of your broad sense of self-worth and the level of satisfaction you have with

yourself; it is how you evaluate and judge yourself (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). A good self-image is

associated with increased self-esteem; a poor self-image often is linked to poor self-esteem, lack of

confidence, and insecurity. Some researchers argue that self-esteem is central to how we view the world

and to our quality of life, indicating the importance of this aspect of self (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001).

Although it is desirable to have high self-esteem, some individuals have such a high opinion of their self-

worth that they believe they are better, more deserving, or more special than others. An inflated self-

image or extremely high self-esteem can negatively impact your friendships, work relationships, and

romantic relationships. Researchers have found that people who keep trying to prove their worth focus

excessively on themselves and have less successful relationships (Park, Crocker, & Vohs, 2006).

On the other hand, people who have low self-esteem tend to engage in excessive attempts to seek

reassurance of their self-worth from others. They look for affirmation to make themselves feel more

secure. However, the attempts frequently backfire, and they end up pushing away the people they most

want close to them. Because a person with low self-esteem needs constant reassurance, other people

begin to feel frustrated and irritated and often socially reject the person (Van Orden & Joiner, 2006). In

these and other types of interactions, self-esteem can influence interpersonal communication. For

example, the more we perceive that our romantic partners are committed to us and to our relationship,

and the more we ourselves experience this relationship commitment, the higher our self-esteem (Rill,

Baiocchi, Hopper, Denker, & Olson, 2009). We can also use communication to provide others with

esteem support, which "is a form of social support that is provided to others with the intent of

enhancing how they feel about themselves and their attributes, abilities, and accomplishments"

(Holmstrom & Burleson, 2011, p. 326). Amanda Holmstrom's (2012) research has found that esteem

support is particularly helpful to others when it is offered as praise, as a comparison of the situation to

someone or something that is worse, or as an expression of caring and affirmation that the situation will

ultimately end well. Providing others with praise, affirmation, and acceptance in these ways can then

assist in raising those individuals' self-esteem (Vonk, 2006).

In fact, Roos Vonk (2006) argues that being accepted and affirmed by those we are close to is the best

path to truly raising our self-esteem; this acceptance from others allows us to feel comfortable and on

solid ground. Because we feel this comfort and stability, we then become more open and less defensive

with others, and we start to feel relaxed and in control. This feeling translates into our increased ability

to grow and to be more determined to better ourselves. This, in turn, reinforces our increased self-

esteem (Vonk, 2006). Thus, the relationship between self-esteem and how we relate to others is crucial

for building and maintaining increased self-esteem.

Healthy self-esteem means thinking highly of yourself and that you can easily create and sustain the

confidence that is essential to your successes in life. You have to work to develop your self-esteem.

When you are successful at something, you create confidence in yourself. This confidence enables you

to take on new challenges, and each new success leads to further self-confidence and increased self-

esteem (see Web Field Trip for more on how social media can build sense of self).

WEB FIELD TRIP

Social Media Use and Our Sense of Self

Researchers Jean M. Twenge and W. Keith Campbell have coined the term narcissism epidemic to reflect

the broad cultural aspects that might play a role in an excessive sense of self-interest and entitlement.

Social media use is one such aspect of this self-involvement. In an opinion piece for the New York Times

(http://www.nytimes.com/), Twenge deciphers the possible connections between social media use and

positive self-views. Conduct a search on the New York Times website for Twenge's article, "It's a

Narcissism Enabler," and then take a moment to read about the premise of The Narcissism Epidemic

(http://www.narcissismepidemic.com/index.html). Then consider the questions provided.

Critical Thinking Questions

9. Do you agree with the assessment that individuals who are more self-interested tend to thrive

on social media? Why or why not?

10. What connections does the author find between social media use and self-esteem?

2.2 Self-Expression and Interpersonal Communication Now that you have a better understanding of the self and the factors that create your self-concept, self-

image, and self-esteem, how do these aspects of the self affect your communication with other people?

Refer back to the "Who am I?" list that you created at the beginning of this chapter. Do any of the

categories or descriptions of who you are influence how you communicate with others? If so, why are

these categories so central to how you communicate with people? Has your communication from others

shaped which descriptions are most important to who you are?

So far in this chapter, we have focused on how the messages from others throughout your life affect

your view of the self. However, a great deal of research in the fields of communication and psychology

has determined that just as your interpersonal communication with other people affects your view of

yourself, the way in which you communicate internally also has an effect on your ability to build positive

relationships with other people. A consistent set of attitudes that define who you are—your identity—

affect your communications with yourself and with others and will be discussed in Chapter 3, but two

other important ways in which intrapersonal and interpersonal functions are interrelated are described

next.

Biological Sex and Gender One of the most controversial topics in communication concerns the communication styles of men and

women and the question of whether the two sexes really communicate differently. This question is best

answered by focusing on how communication scholars characterize sex. If we only measure how males

and females biologically differ—which the majority of communication researchers do by simply

comparing how males and females communicate—the differences are almost nonexistent. In fact, a

landmark analysis of over 1,000 research studies that compared males' and females' communication

patterns based on their biological makeup found that biological sex differences only provide 1% of an

explanation for how and why we communicate the way that we do (Canary & Hause, 1993). In other

words, according to this analysis, whether we are born and live biologically as a male or a female has

little to no influence on how we communicate interpersonally. But researchers can also consider male

and female differences in communication by focusing on socially and culturally constructed ideas of sex

and gender.

Creatas Images/Creatas/Thinkstock

Unlike biological sex, which is physiologically determined, gender orientation is a social construction

based upon a combination of several different individual, societal, and relational factors.

Gender Orientation Biological sex and gender orientation are related but different. Biological sex is physiologically

determined. Gender orientation, on the other hand, is psychologically created and is based partially

upon a combination of one's biological sex, group membership, and culture, and a host of other

individual, relational, and societal factors. Specifically, one's gender orientation is a "social, symbolic

construction that expresses the meanings a society confers on biological sex" (Wood & Dindia, 1998, p.

20). In fact, some researchers argue that gender orientation can be a problematic way to consider

differences between males and females because it is at least partially based on a society's gender

stereotypes (Canary & Hause, 1993). Others note that gender orientation involves identifying with

norms for feminine and masculine sex roles (Wheeless & Duran, 1982). This means that some people's

gender orientation can be more influenced by traditional roles and social norms than others. However,

because gender orientation takes into account an individual's physiological makeup and his or her

environment, it is typically a better representation of males and females than biological sex alone.

When directly comparing biological sex and gender orientation in relation to different aspects of

interpersonal communication, gender orientation is consistently a better predictor. For example,

researchers found that gender orientation was a more useful concept than biological sex for

understanding how romantic partners express jealousy (Aylor & Dainton, 2001). Specifically, masculinity

was associated with destructive, antisocial methods of expressing jealousy, and femininity was linked to

a direct, constructive form of jealousy expression called integrative communication. In addition, gender

orientation is a better predictor than biological sex when understanding how individuals maintain their

relationships (Stafford, Dainton, & Haas, 2000).

Like biological sex, we all possess a particular gender orientation. Gender orientation should not be

considered as on a continuum, with masculinity and femininity at each extreme and androgyny at the

midpoint. Instead, each gender orientation is an individual construct or dimension that is uniquely

related to behavior (Stephen & Harrison, 1985). For example, a masculine gender orientation is

consistently linked to the increased use of instrumental and assertive communication in interactions,

including accomplishing goals, influencing others, or finishing a job or task, whereas a feminine

orientation is more closely associated with expressive and affiliation messages such as focusing on

relational communication, closeness with others, and emotions (Aylor, 2003; Palomares, 2012). An

androgynous individual, who possesses aspects of both masculine and feminine gender orientations,

could have more satisfying relationships than either masculine or feminine individuals because he or she

has the advantage of being able to employ both communication styles with some degree of skill (Ickes,

1985). Androgynous individuals also are best able to adapt and be flexible, as well as focus on and be

positive toward others, during interpersonal interactions (Wheeless & Duran, 1982). If you are curious

about your own gender orientation, one of the most popular assessments of this concept, Sandra Bem's

(1974) Sex-Role Inventory is provided in the Self-Test feature.

Different Cultures versus Gender Similarities Hypotheses

Another way to consider whether males and females are more alike or different in how they

communicate is by understanding two competing ideas: the different cultures and the gender

similarities hypotheses. Linguist Deborah Tannen's (2001) work, which includes the bestselling book You

Just Don't Understand: Men and Women in Conversation, argues that men and women have different

communication styles because they grow up in different worlds or cultures. Tannen supports the

different cultures hypothesis of gender, as does John Gray, whose book Men Are from Mars, Women

Are from Venus, takes this notion quite literally. According to this hypothesis, although young boys and

girls occasionally play together, they spend most of their time playing in groups of the same sex. Tannen

notes boys' and girls' favorite games are different, and their ways of using language in their games are

different as well. She states:

Boys tend to play outside in large groups that are hierarchically structured. Their groups have a leader

who tells others what to do and how to do it. . . . It is by giving orders and making them stick that high

status is negotiated. . . . Boys' games have winners and losers and elaborate systems of rules that are

frequently the subjects of arguments. (Tannen, 2001, p. 43)

Girls, on the other hand, says Tannen, engage in games such as jump rope, hopscotch, or playing house,

where everyone gets a turn, cooperation is required, and there are no winners or losers.

In contrast, Janet Shibley Hyde (2005) and Kathryn Dindia (2006) are two of many proponents of the

gender similarities hypothesis, which states that males and females are much more alike than different

in terms of how they think, feel, and communicate. Though there are some differences between males

and females, the differences are quite small and generally inconsequential. Dindia amusingly portrays

the rather minimal size of these differences by titling a book chapter based on this position, "Men Are

from North Dakota, Women Are from South Dakota." If we consider which hypothesis the bulk of

scholarly research supports, in both communication and psychology, the gender similarities hypothesis

is overwhelmingly upheld (e.g., Canary & Hause, 1993; Hyde, 2005). Thus, though biological sex is a

central aspect of the self, being male or being female does not fundamentally alter how we think, feel,

or communicate.

Overall, we must be cautious about attributing communication differences solely to biological sex or

even gender orientation. However, when you communicate across gender lines, keep in mind that, like

culture, socialized gender roles or orientation may slightly predispose women and men to interpret

messages differently in certain circumstances. As you have learned thus far in this text, in interpersonal

communication, it is important to check your perceptions with the other person to determine if he or

she interprets a message in the same way that you do.

Self-Assessment

Bem's Sex-Role Inventory

Rate yourself on each item below to generate sex-type scores.

There are a total of 60 items for you to review.

1. self-reliant

never or almost never true

slightly not true

somewhat not true

neither true nor untrue

slightly true

somewhat true

always or almost always true

2. yielding

never or almost never true

slightly not true

somewhat not true

neither true nor untrue

slightly true

somewhat true

always or almost always true

3. helpful

never or almost never true

slightly not true

somewhat not true

neither true nor untrue

slightly true

somewhat true

always or almost always true

4. defends own beliefs

never or almost never true

slightly not true

somewhat not true

neither true nor untrue

slightly true

somewhat true

always or almost always true

5. cheerful

never or almost never true

slightly not true

somewhat not true

neither true nor untrue

slightly true

somewhat true

always or almost always true

6. moody

never or almost never true

slightly not true

somewhat not true

neither true nor untrue

slightly true

somewhat true

always or almost always true

The Self Presented Online As mediated interactions continue to increase and become more central in our interpersonal

communication, we are more aware of how we present ourselves online. For example, Facebook, which

was launched about a decade ago in 2004, has 1.15 billion monthly and 699 million daily users, as of

June 2013 (Facebook Key Facts, 2013). In addition, the number of Internet users on Twitter doubled

from 8% in 2010 to 16% in 2012 (Duggan & Brenner, 2013). Such exponential growth of these social

networking sites also means that we have new online arenas to help us craft and showcase to others

who we are as individuals. What is unique about how we present ourselves online versus offline?

According to Catalina Toma (2012), the nature of Facebook self-presentation is shaped by the following

technological parameters, all of which could be applied to other social networking sites as well:

 There is a large audience, including family members, friends, acquaintances, and even strangers.

 The asynchronous nature of social networking provides extended time to think about and create

claims about the self.

 The ability to edit the content of one's social networking profiles allows users to continually

alter or refine presented information.

 These unique online parameters create a highly controllable and selective presentation of the

self and should motivate users to design desirable, yet honest, self-presentations.

Three-quarters of students reported that their Facebook profile pages accurately represented who they

were (Stern & Taylor, 2007). A review of college students' Facebook use determined that the majority of

student users posted personal information, such as their birthdays, hometowns, sexual orientation, and

relationship status (Foon Hew, 2011). By reporting this type of information, Facebook users establish an

online identity by categorizing themselves as members of specific demographic groups—such as by

ethnicity, gender, or sexuality—and even co-cultures—such as fans of specific types of music, movies, or

teams (Pempek, Yermolayeva, & Calvert, 2009). These online identities can be carefully constructed to

reflect cultural and social norms and values and are accomplished by using positive language to describe

the user as being outgoing and socially desirable (Zhao, Grasmuch, & Martin, 2008). In fact, a positive

image of one's self on Facebook significantly boosted students' self-esteem (Toma, 2012).

However, online identity construction can also be less direct and explicit. For example, the number and

quality of one's online friends is a more direct method for examining online identity construction (e.g.,

Utz, 2010; Walther, Van Der Heide, Kim, Westerman, & Tong, 2008). Researchers can also get a glimpse

of users' online personalities via images, status updates, and posts on friends' walls (Zhao et al., 2008).

These indirect sources of information about an individual's online self continue to expand. Facebook, for

example, now includes the Ticker, which allows users to view their friends' Facebook activities in real

time; there are also image-based social networking sites such as Pinterest and Instagram (Duggan &

Brenner, 2013).

What do these findings tell us about our online selves? First, though we believe our online identities

closely reflect who we are offline, there is evidence that we have the motivation and ability to craft

slightly different, and likely better, versions of ourselves online. These positive and selective self-

presentation options can improve our job prospects, as well as our self-esteem. Second, it is difficult to

fully monitor and alter our online identities because there are many direct and indirect messages that

can provide information about the self. Finally, we don't yet know how newer sites such as Twitter,

Instagram, and Pinterest help to create and shape online identities because researchers have focused

almost exclusively on the role of Facebook. But because these newer sites are either image-based or

focused on a limited number of characters, they are likely different from Facebook in how they create

the online self and so require further study. Take a look at IPC in the Digital Age to learn more about

your Facebook self.

IPC IN THE DIGITAL AGE

What Does Your Facebook Profile Say about How You See Yourself?

When you set up an online profile, you try to identify how you see yourself and how you want others to

see you. You ask yourself basic questions: What core things should people know about me? Is it helpful

or necessary to share my gender, birthday, or occupation? Do I have a religious or political view, and if

so, is it important enough to my identity to list it online? After you've set up your online profile, you

choose the people you want to associate with and the groups you want to join; you decide which of your

hobbies and interests to include, based upon how they affect and reflect how you see yourself. And

finally, you decide if you should post pictures on your profile and which pictures send specific messages

about who you are and what you value. Do you want to post a professional portrait where every hair is

in place, a photo acting silly with friends, or a photo of you hiking a particularly impressive mountain?

Social networking sites like Facebook prompt you to contemplate such questions from a unique

perspective. The combination of items you post on your page, including comments and images, is a

representation of you.

A research study conducted by undergraduates in communication at Chapman University was the first

known to formally analyze young college students' Facebook profile photographs. These student

researchers, led by Noelle Hum, argue that group affiliations, hobbies, and other self-categorizations on

Facebook allow each user to construct an image of the self, or an online identity, that is communicated

to other online users. A Facebook profile photograph, along with a cover photograph feature added in

2011, is "one of the most telling pieces of self-disclosure or image construction" (Hum et al., 2011, p.

1828). An analysis of 150 college student profile photos revealed that these images tended to be posed,

were appropriate for all audiences to view, depicted little to no physical activity, and contained only the

profile user. The content of these profile pictures was also consistent for both male and female users.

Hum and her colleagues (2011) conclude that users likely select their profile photographs with the goal

of portraying a professional, appropriate image in anticipation of a postgraduation job search. Now

apply these findings to your online identity.

Critical Thinking Questions

11. Look at your Facebook profile photograph and think about what it might convey to others. Is

your photo posed or candid? Does it show you engaged in a physical activity or sitting or

standing still? Is it appropriate (i.e., would you be embarrassed if your 6-year-old nephew or

your grandmother saw it)? Are you alone in the photo or are there others with you?

12. Think about these questions for other public online images of yourself, including your Facebook

cover photograph, your Twitter photo, and the photos you post if you have Instagram or

Pinterest accounts. Do these images offer information about different parts of your identity? Did

you make a conscious choice to convey these different identities?

13. Consider again the different photos associated with your separate online networks. If each site

is meant to convey a different element of your identity, what is the purpose of these separate

online identities? Why are they different?

2.3 Developing Communication Competence Before you read this chapter, many aspects of your self-concept, self-image, self-esteem, and self-

expression were already an unconscious part of your life. By focusing on and consciously considering

these factors, you have already taken the first step to improving your intrapersonal communication and

your communication competency. What is communication competence? Competent sometimes has a

connotation of "good enough" or "passable." However, as it relates to interpersonal communication, the

word can have an entirely different meaning: Competence is what we think of when we envision the

qualities of a skilled communicator (Spitzberg, 2000; Spitzberg & Cupach, 2011). Communication

researchers Brian Spitzberg and William Cupach introduced the concept of communication competence

nearly 30 years ago, and their definition of the essential aspects of communication competence is our

focus here. Though Spitzberg and Cupach (2011) believe that being interpersonally skillful is essential for

developing interpersonal relationships, they also estimate that 7–25% of adults are not interpersonally

competent. Yet with some guidance, communication competence is an important interpersonal skill that

many individuals can improve.

Recall from the previous chapter that effectiveness and appropriateness are both essential parts of

communication competence. However, these two concepts can conflict, and learning to successfully

balance them can be a challenge. The following sections will elaborate on both concepts, briefly

describe three factors that can improve your communication competence, and introduce a test that you

can complete to determine your current level of communication competence.

Communication Effectiveness Being an effective communicator means, quite simply, achieving your goals. Effectiveness is linked to

your ability to get what you want from an interaction. This can be as simple as achieving shared meaning

with another person; when the message you encode is decoded in a similar manner. Effectiveness can

also involve specific goals, or intentions, that you bring to and take part in during an interaction. For

example, you might make an appointment with your boss at work to ask for a raise, and, in this case,

you would not classify the communication as effective simply because you and your boss both

understand what the meeting is about. Instead, you would feel that the interaction is effective only if

your boss agrees to increase your salary. Thus, effectiveness can be assessed at multiple levels of an

interaction, but we tend to focus on the immediate goal of the conversation.

Though being an effective communicator seems simple, it becomes more complicated when you

acknowledge that there are two communicators with separate but interdependent communication

goals. In other words, is it possible for both individuals to be effective communicators, to achieve

multiple outcomes? The answer to this question depends on a number of factors. Consider again the

meeting you scheduled with your boss at work. If the communicators' goals conflict—you seek a raise

but your boss's goal is to not agree to one—then it is difficult to achieve mutual communication

effectiveness. However, if you and your boss compromise, each giving up something in order to reach an

agreement that works for both of you, then you and your boss will likely leave the interaction feeling as

if you at least somewhat accomplished your goals. However, if both communicators have similar goals—

you and your boss both want you to get a raise—it is much easier for everyone to feel as if they are

effective. Further, it is possible to still feel you are effective even if you do not achieve all of your initial

goals. Communication is a process, which means that your goals might change over the course of an

interaction or that a new goal might become more important. Thus, if your boss responds to your

request for a raise by telling you that the company is actually in trouble and that they are struggling just

to keep you on as an employee, your goal will likely switch from seeking more money to making a strong

case to keep your job.

Jupiterimages/BananaStock/Thinkstock

Social norms can help you determine what is appropriate in a specific communication interaction. In U.S.

culture, for example, shaking hands with a new acquaintance is a customary behavior in professional

contexts.

Communication Appropriateness Communication competence is also linked with appropriateness, or taking into account the rules,

norms, and expectations of others in an interaction. For example, communicators are appropriate when

they learn and follow rules during an interaction, which are directions indicating the obligated,

preferred, and prohibited behaviors in certain contexts and situations (Shimanoff, 1980). These rules

take into account the broader context of the interaction, and the context of the interaction assists in

determining which appropriateness standards are to be met (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2011).

Some rules are established by a society or culture in the form of social norms. For example, in U.S.

culture, it is a customary social norm to shake hands when you first meet someone in a professional

context. Rules or norms can also be unique to a relationship, such as monogamy when in an exclusive

relationship with a romantic partner. Some rules can even be specific to an individual. For example, a

professor might ask students to refrain from using laptops or tablets during class. Such rules and

expectations are often implicit, meaning that they are not directly and clearly stated, yet we are aware

of them. In fact, we are often most mindful and conscious of rules and expectations when they are

broken.

As noted above, sometimes it is difficult to balance effectiveness and appropriateness during an

interaction, but both are necessary elements of communication competence. The ability to be both

effective and appropriate takes practice and shows that you have interpersonal skill, which Spitzberg

and Cupach define as "repeatable goal-directed behaviors, behavioral patterns, and behavior sequences

that are appropriate to the interactional context" (2011, p. 489). You might get what you want if you are

effective but not appropriate, yet doing so will likely upset, hurt, or damage your relationship with the

other person. Conversely, if you follow the rules and act the way you are expected to—if you are

appropriate but not effective— you might not get what you want. However, communicators who make

an effort to get along and treat others with respect are more likely to achieve their goals.

Factors that Facilitate Communication Competence How can we become competent communicators? According to Spitzberg and Cupach's model of

communication competence, there are three things that can assist us in being more competent: (1)

knowledge, (2) motivation, and (3) skill (1984). Knowledge is the necessary awareness of which

behaviors or messages are best in a particular situation. This knowledge can be about content, such as

the topic of the conversation or the other communicator. For example, you might have knowledge

about someone's food or movie preferences. But knowledge can also be about procedure, such as how

an interaction should or could proceed. For example, you might know how to best solve a problem or

predict someone's reaction to a message. Both content and procedural knowledge can improve

communication competence.

The second factor that facilitates competence is motivation, which Spitzberg and Cupach (2011) define

as a force that energizes and guides us to approach or avoid in a social situation. In other words, we

have to actually want to be effective and appropriate in order to be competent. We may have the

knowledge that we need to be competent, but choose to not use it. Conflict is an example of an

interpersonal situation where communicators often are not motivated to be competent. If you are

engaged in a conflict with a close relational partner, you might get so upset and frustrated by the topic

and the messages exchanged that you intentionally decide to insult your partner, punch a hole in a wall,

or storm out—all of which display limited communication competence.

Finally, skill is a factor that facilitates competence and is similar to the general notion of interpersonal

skill discussed above. Skill is the ability to demonstrate the behaviors deemed most competent in a

particular situation or context. Skill is dependent on knowledge and motivation; we must possess both

before we can develop skill. However, even if we are knowledgeable and motivated, there is no

guarantee we will be skilled in an interaction. For example, you might know how to behave and be

motivated to act accordingly in a specific situation, but perhaps you still perform poorly. This type of

response can happen in a job interview, a public speaking situation, and even a first date.

Complete the communication competence scale provided in the Self-Test here. Communication

competence is an important interpersonal skill, and it requires awareness of our individual

communication patterns. Try to be honest with yourself as you complete the scale, or even ask a trusted

friend, family member, or romantic partner to complete it on your behalf. Then evaluate your results

and reflect on areas you could improve. The next sections will discuss techniques for improving your

intrapersonal communication and developing your communication competence.

Self-Assessment

Interpersonal Communication Competence

The following self-test is based on Spitzberg and Cupach's model of communication competence (1984).

Answer each item honestly as it currently applies to you in typical conversations with others.

There are a total of 18 statements for you to review.

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

strongly disagree

slightly disagree

unsure

slightly agree

strongly agree

2. I successfully achieve my interpersonal goals.

strongly disagree

slightly disagree

unsure

slightly agree

strongly agree

3. I show my understanding of others by reflecting their thoughts and feelings to them.

strongly disagree

slightly disagree

unsure

slightly agree

strongly agree

4. It is easy for me to manage conversations that way I want them to proceed.

strongly disagree

slightly disagree

unsure

slightly agree

strongly agree

5. I show my engagement in conversation both nonverbally and verbally.

strongly disagree

slightly disagree

unsure

slightly agree

strongly agree

6. I use a wide range of behaviors, including self-disclosure and humor, to adapt to others.

strongly disagree

slightly disagree

unsure

slightly agree

strongly agree

2.4 Improving Your Intrapersonal Communication The relationship between intrapersonal and interpersonal communication can be explained as follows:

Who we are as individuals is inextricably linked with how we see the world, how we communicate with

others, and with how others see us. Thus, understanding the different aspects of self—self-concept, self-

image, and self-esteem—can help you become a more competent communicator. Below, we offer some

specific strategies to improve your intrapersonal communication.

Increase Your Self-Awareness There are two techniques you can use to increase your self-awareness. The first is to be conscious about

how you interpret your world. Take a step back and evaluate how you communicate with yourself and

with others. Pay attention to what you choose to focus on, and ask yourself what internal factors, such

as past experiences and self-esteem, influence how you approach and perceive a situation. Look for

differences between past experiences and present circumstances. Why might such differences exist?

Education is the second technique you can use to increase your self-awareness. Some people perceive

and understand significant differences or nuances in a given scenario; elements that are not noticed by

people whose senses are not trained to perceive the same things. For example, music sounds different

to a trained musician than it does to an untrained ear, and wine connoisseurs can perceive subtle flavors

in wines that are indistinguishable to someone who has not trained his or her palate to recognize flavor

nuances. As you continue to study interpersonal communication, the knowledge you gain about the

communication process will increase your awareness of how you and others communicate. Learning to

use critical thinking and learning to differentiate among facts, opinions, observations, and inferences

can help you strengthen your self-awareness and recognize that your view is one of many. See Everyday

Communication Challenges to learn more about understanding how you communicate at the office.

EVERYDAY COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES

Workplace Feedback—Honestly Getting to Know Your Career Self

It is difficult to objectively evaluate your own work performance, as well as the image you convey.

However, you are often very aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the people you work with every

day. So how do you learn to identify your value and perceived image as an employee? You can ask your

coworkers and supervisor if they would be willing to evaluate you. In fact, many employers already use a

form of employee evaluation known as 360-degree feedback. This type of evaluation allows individual

employees, like you, to get a direct assessment of their work-related performance from their employers

as well as the people in their personal lives. By using a multi-rater feedback system, you can learn more

about your own strengths and weaknesses as an employee.

Even if your workplace does not offer 360-degree feedback, you likely receive some formal type of

feedback. For example, many companies conduct an annual review of their employees according to a

number of factors, as well as offer comments about each employee's strengths and weaknesses. Getting

the honest opinions of coworkers, supervisors, customers or clients, and even the people who know you

best outside of work may help you discern what kinds of tasks you enjoy, are most skilled at, and what

areas of your job you can learn to grow into. If the feedback includes constructive criticisms, resist the

urge to immediately discount such comments. Remember that you have a particular view of yourself

and that others might view you differently. Openly and honestly consider all forms of feedback that you

receive—both positive and negative—and determine how you might integrate this feedback into your

future workplace interactions to improve your overall performance. This sort of feedback mechanism

can help give you a better picture of yourself. So if you want to be a better communicator, seek out and

consider the advice of people who know you in each of your different communication contexts.

Critical Thinking Questions

14. Review any formal feedback you have received for your work performance. What were you

praised for? What were some suggested areas of improvement?

15. If you seek formal or informal feedback from coworkers or your superior, what self concepts

from this chapter do you find to be most relevant to how you responded to this feedback?

16. How can others' feedback of your professional performance uniquely inform how you

communicate and do your job in the future?

Accept Yourself Review the "Who am I?" list you created at the beginning of this chapter. Which of the items in your list

are positive and which are negative? Are there many aspects you would like to change or improve? Do

you like yourself? If you accept and like yourself, despite your faults and failings, you are more likely to

carry a positive attitude into your interpersonal communication with others. If you accept yourself as

you are, you are more likely to accept others as they are too. If you can admit and forgive yourself for

mistakes, you are more likely to allow others to make mistakes and to forgive them as well.

One way to build acceptance of yourself is to look at how you interpret your own behavior and consider

how realistic you are in appraising your abilities and behavior. Do you rationalize or make excuses for

unacceptable behavior or, on the other hand, do you fail to give yourself credit? For example, if you do

well on a test, do you tell yourself that it was just luck or that the test was easy, or do you attribute your

success to your hard work and study? Another way you can better accept yourself is to pay attention to

and internalize the positive feedback that you receive from others.

Remember that you can choose what you will accept and "own" about yourself and what you will reject.

Some people who received negative feedback about themselves from other people when they were

children carry these negative self-images throughout their lives. You do not have to be a victim of other

people's opinions. You can, as an old southern expression says, "Rise above your raising." You are not

what others think of you, and you are not necessarily what others have told you that you are. You have

the ability to create your own identity.

Practice Your Skills and Be Adaptable Finally, to improve your intrapersonal communication, you must practice the communication skills you

are learning about in this text. Completing the exercises and activities in this text, and employing the

tools you acquire, can help you be a more competent communicator. In addition, learning to be more

aware and mindful of what works in your interactions with others, and what doesn't, can build your

knowledge, which then contributes to increased competence. Adaptability, however, is also an

important skill you can develop to increase communication competence. You should strive to be flexible

and tailor your messages to each specific person and interaction; realize that one message or way of

communicating will not work in every, or even most, situations. Reflect on an interaction as it occurs and

adjust how you encode and decode messages.

Summary and Resources The self is a critical component in communication. It affects the way you interact with other people and

the way they interact with you. Intrapersonal communication occurs when we communicate with

ourselves, via our thoughts, or internal dialogue. Your self-concept is a collection of the traits and

characteristics you use to describe yourself. Most researchers believe that who you think you are is a

complex mix of how you see yourself; how others see you; what parents, teachers, and peers have told

you about yourself; and what your society or culture tells you that you should be. Your self-concept is

learned, organized, and dynamic, or changeable. You develop your self-concept through interactions

with other people who act as a mirror reflecting to you the way others see and judge you. This is known

as your looking-glass self. You internalize these viewpoints of other people, and they affect the way you

act today as an adult and the way you communicate with yourself and with others. You also compare

your abilities and opinions to those of other people (social comparison). Culture has the ability to shape

how you see yourself. However, you have the ability to view yourself objectively, to change your self-

concept, and to make choices about what judgments of others you will accept or reject.

Your self-concept gives rise to a broad, more permanent view of yourself, your self-image. The self-

image is the overall mental picture you have of yourself—the combination of both your internal view of

yourself and the valuation of others, as well as your physical appearance and body image, and the

totality of your experiences, desires, and feelings. Self-image is important because how you think about

yourself affects your physical, mental, social, emotional, and spiritual well-being. It also influences how

you respond to life and can determine the quality of your relationships with others.

Your self-image, in turn, results in your level of self-esteem, the beliefs and feelings you have about

yourself. Self-esteem is tied to your interaction with others. Esteem support from another person can

help you build your self-esteem. In addition, being accepted and affirmed by others can raise your

confidence in yourself, which then helps to enhance your self-esteem. However, your self-concept, self-

image, and self-esteem are not destiny. You can build your self-image and your self-esteem by

successful experiences. Your successes create self-confidence, which enables you to take on new

challenges and to increase your self-esteem in an upward spiral of success. You can also enhance your

self-esteem through affirmations and positive self-talk.

Aspects of your identity can also influence how you communicate with others. Your biological sex, which

is the physiological difference between males and females, is traditionally thought to have a large

influence on how we communicate. However, research finds that this is not so. Rather, our gender

orientation, or our socially constructed expression of how society views biological sex, is a better

predictor of how we communicate than our biological sex. This viewpoint is also consistent with the

gender similarities hypothesis, which states that males and females are more alike than different in how

they communicate. In contrast, the different cultures hypothesis of gender states that males and

females fundamentally differ in how they communicate with one another.

One way to improve your intrapersonal and interpersonal communication is to develop your

communication competence. Being competent involves balancing your effectiveness with your

appropriateness. This ability to balance is a skill that can be developed by acquiring knowledge about

how to be competent, being motivated to be a competent communicator, and further working to

develop and refine competence skills. Overall, you can learn to change the way you view the world and

the way you communicate with yourself and with others by increasing your self-awareness, building an

identity around acceptance of yourself, and practicing the skills of communication competence that you

are learning in this text.

Chapter 2 Flashcards

Key Terms Click on each key term to see the definition.

appropriateness

different cultures hypothesis of gender

effectiveness

esteem support

gender orientation

gender similarities hypothesis

intrapersonal communication

knowledge

looking-glass self

model of communication competence

motivation

perception

reference group

rules

self-concept

self-esteem

self-fulfilling prophecy

self-image

skill

social comparison

Critical Thinking and Discussion Questions  Which aspect of the self—self-concept, self-image, or self-esteem—do you find most challenging

or are you most negative about in your own intrapersonal communication? What can you do to

improve how you view that aspect of self?

 How much do you think that others' impressions of you affect how you view yourself? What can

you do to combat the effect of negative external messages on your view of yourself?

 How much does your online self reflect who you are offline? How much effort do you put into

how others view who you are online?

 How much do you believe that your gender orientation contributes to how you communicate?

Are there particular situations or conversational topics where your gender orientation becomes

particularly important?

 Which component of communication competence—effectiveness or appropriateness—do you

tend to focus on in your interactions with others? How can you improve your communication

competence using the concepts of knowledge, motivation, and skill?

Introduction Think back to the interaction between Kim and Pat that we presented in Chapter 1. In that scenario, Kim

and Pat used different channels (including e-mail, mobile phones, and face-to-face) to engage in a

conflict with each other about what they were going to have for dinner that night. Their interaction

ended rather abruptly, with Pat saying that Kim's making a big deal about nothing and asking Kim to

help figure out what to do about dinner. Think now about how their interaction might have progressed

from that point. There are a number of different ways that Kim and Pat could have ended their

conversation. Instead of Kim saying, "Oh, I'm making a big deal out of nothing?" she could have

suggested that they just agree on what to eat for dinner. For example, Kim might have said, "Well, let's

get pizza. We're both hungry." With Pat replying, "Fine. I'll order it, and we can talk about something

else." This closing of the conversation does not fully resolve the issue but does at least allow both

individuals to have their say and conclude their interaction fairly amicably.

But let's also consider two other possible scenarios. In the first, the conflict escalates, with Kim

screaming, "That's because you NEVER listen to me! You are so selfish!" and Pat responding, "Well, all

you do is blather constantly about nonsense, so it is impossible to remember everything you say." Then,

both Kim and Pat leave—Kim goes into the den to play video games, and Pat puts on his sneakers and

goes for a run. The situation remains unresolved, and the outcome is not satisfying for either of them.

Finally, Kim and Pat could take the time and make an effort to truly listen to and understand each other.

Kim could say, "I guess I had not made that clear about being home early enough to have dinner

together. Sorry about that." Pat replies, "OK. I will make a mental note to pay more attention. I'm sorry

too." Here, Kim and Pat both feel that the situation has been largely resolved, and they are satisfied with

the outcome.

Which of these three outcomes is the most competent? Why? Even though we know when we read

these different interactions that the third outcome—listening and understanding—is most preferred

and the most competent and that the second outcome, conflict escalation, should be avoided, we likely

find ourselves in similar situations. How do we get into the habit of using the messages that increase our

chances for communication success?

Throughout this text, our goal has been to assist you in understanding and improving how you

interpersonally communicate with others. One important method for you to communicate more

competently in interactions is by assessing and evaluating your interpersonal communication patterns.

This process can help you determine what works and what does not work. What expectations do you

typically have when you communicate with others? To what extent do those expectations differ

according to the context or situation that you find yourself in, such as in a business or professional or

mediated communication context? How do you respond to challenges or difficulties in your

conversations and in your relationships? This chapter will help you learn to set and manage expectations

and identify challenges in your interactions with others across different contexts and situations. We will

also offer strategies and methods for creating, evaluating, and reevaluating plans and goals that are

related to competent interpersonal communication.

11.1 Evaluating Communication Success How do you know if an interaction went well? Your will likely feel an interaction is successful if three

elements take place. If you and your partner truly hear and understand each other, validate each other's

viewpoints, and conclude the interaction feeling as if you both acted effectively and appropriately. We

saw these elements in the third possible outcome of Kim and Pat's conversation.

Throughout this text, we have discussed the importance of communication competence as a means for

evaluating whether or not your communication is successful. Though communication competence is an

important way to assess your communication, there are two other concepts that you can also use to

decide how well, or how poorly, an interaction unfolded. There are three focus areas to consider when

you evaluate communication success: shared meaning, communication satisfaction, and communication

competence.

Recall that we discussed the importance of shared meaning in Chapter 1. We return to this concept here

to emphasize its importance as a communication outcome. Next we introduce the concept of

communication satisfaction and discuss how it can be used to assess the success of an interaction. We

will then consider how we can use communication competence to create better outcomes and have

greater success in a variety of communication contexts.

Shared Meaning

altrendo images/Stockbyte/Thinkstock

Everyone has different viewpoints, backgrounds, and perceptions. The more communicators can agree

about what their messages mean, the more likely they are to achieve shared meaning.

Recall the definition of communication presented in Chapter 1: Communication is a process that

involves two or more individuals and involves creating shared meaning by using verbal and nonverbal

messages in a variety of contexts. From this definition, you can see that the most basic outcome of any

communication situation is for all participants in the interaction to "be on the same page" about what is

discussed and how the messages are interpreted. But human beings are simply too diverse—with

different viewpoints, cultural backgrounds, biases and stereotypes, and general perceptions or ways of

viewing the world—to ever entirely share meaning with one another. Yet the more everyone agrees

about what their messages mean and how they are interpreted, the more likely it is to achieve shared

meaning. Thus, the first and most fundamental way that we can evaluate the success of an interaction is

to determine if you and your partner both understand what is being discussed and derive similar

meaning from the interaction.

This is easier said than done, however. The extent to which you can accomplish shared meaning with a

conversation partner is based on a number of factors. First, the types of messages that you use, verbal

or nonverbal, are important. If you are restricted to one type of message—for example, primarily using

verbal communication in text messages or e-mails—this can decrease the likelihood that you and your

partner will reach the same understanding. If our communication is grounded in the expectations to

both verbally and nonverbally communicate in an interaction, then it is more challenging to create

shared meaning in a situation where we are unable to do so. But if we are aware this challenge exists,

then we can approach such interactions with more patience and thus increase the likelihood of creating

shared meaning.

A second factor that can hinder the creation of shared meaning is differences between the interaction

partners. We have an easier time understanding people who are like us because we share common life

experiences and perspectives based on this similarity. These shared experiences and perspectives might

also explain why we are attracted to those who are similar to us. Have you ever met someone who grew

up in the same town as you? It was probably easy to carry on a conversation with that person about

where you each went to school, the places you spent time, favorite restaurants or foods, and events

that happened in your area. This conversational ease is based on your similarities.

However, we do not exclusively interact with others who are similar to us. Our identification with

different groups—ethnic, religious, political, or generational—can dictate and shape how we interact

with others. This concept is called intergroup communication (Giles, 2012). Today's globalized world

and the technological advances that enable us to communicate across great distances provide us with

many unique and invaluable opportunities to talk to, and learn from, individuals who come from

different groups. What can we do to reduce intergroup communication differences that can be a barrier

to shared meaning? A simple but extremely effective method is to have more contact with members of

different groups; doing so improves our attitudes toward and reduces prejudices about those who differ

from us (Harwood & Joyce, 2012). Traveling to different places, talking to people with whom we do not

usually interact, and even using the Internet to connect with members of different groups are all ways

to increase contact with individuals from other groups.

The context of the interaction is a final factor that can affect the creation of shared meaning. In online

contexts, for example, we strive to put forth a more positive identity than when we communicate face-

to-face. These more positive, online depictions can be a barrier when creating shared meaning. For

example, when we meet someone in person for the first time, after connection via an online dating

website, and we might find that their online description was not an accurate depiction.

Health interactions also are contexts where meanings are commonly distorted. For example, in one

study, almost 25% of Americans reported leaving a patient-provider interaction feeling as if the

healthcare provider did not answer their questions (Davis et al., 2006). One way to improve shared

meaning in healthcare interactions is to bring a close relationship partner with you to medical

appointments and involve the person in the diagnosis, management, and treatment of health conditions

(Bevan & Pecchioni, 2008). Involving a trusted contact or seeking out the viewpoint of others who were

a part of an interaction can help increase the likelihood of creating shared meaning. These different

perspectives can provide you with information that you had not considered or assist you in considering

how others interpreted the messages, both of which can contribute to creating shared meaning.

Overall, the creation of shared meaning is the most basic successful communication outcome that we

strive for, and, though there can be multiple barriers, there are strategies that can help minimize these

obstacles and increase the likelihood of creating shared meaning (see Table 11.1).

Table 11.1: Creating shared meaning: Barriers and solutions

to consider

Factors that Can Inhibit Shared Meaning

Examples Strategies to Counteract Inhibiting Factors

Message-type restrictions E-mails can limit the communicators' ability to transmit nonverbal messages.

Acknowledge the limitations of different channels and exercise patience when using such channels.

Different backgrounds and experiences among interaction partners

Communicators from different countries or cultures might not have similar life experiences.

Interact more often with those who are different (increase intergroup communication situations).

Interaction contexts Online profiles might not be accurate or candid depictions of the real-world individuals.

Involve a trusted contact who can help you navigate challenging contexts.

Communication Satisfaction In 1978 communication researcher Michael Hecht made a case for the importance of assessing

communication effects. He proposed that an important way to evaluate the success of an interaction is

by determining the level of communication satisfaction that its participants experience. Communication

satisfaction (CS) is defined as the positive outcome that is derived from a communication situation

where goals and expectations are successfully fulfilled (Hecht, 1978). In other words, you are satisfied

with your interaction if what you expected out of the exchange is fulfilled (Anderson & Emmers-

Sommer, 2006). Evaluating your level of CS after an interaction can increase your awareness of how

what you say and how you say it could affect you, your partner, and your relationship (Bevan &

Stetzenbach, 2007). This self-awareness, then, can help increase your overall communication

competence. Thus, CS is the second focus area when evaluating communication success.

Communication satisfaction is an important interaction outcome in intercultural, mediated, family, and

organizational contexts. For example, when individuals from different cultures interact for the first time,

the more ethnocentric and communicatively apprehensive the individuals are, the lower their

communication satisfaction (Neulip, 2012). Individuals who had relationships exclusively with others

online had higher communication satisfaction when they communicated more frequently with their

online partner (Anderson & Emmers-Sommer, 2006). Communication satisfaction also increased overall

satisfaction in these online-only relationships. Further, young adult siblings were most likely to express

their jealousy to each other via avoidance but ironically were dissatisfied with this form of

communication (Bevan & Stetzenbach, 2007). This finding shows that we do not always choose to

communicate in a satisfying way, even when we may know that there is a potentially more satisfying

option, such as being open and direct.

In organizations, individuals' evaluations of their communication satisfaction for interactions with a

coworker were higher when they believed that their coworker could take other individuals' perspectives

(Park & Raile, 2010). Perspective-taking is an aspect of empathy that involves being able to adopt

another person's viewpoint, and this skill is thus an important way to communicate effectively in

organizations. In addition, the greater an employee's communication satisfaction within an organization,

the better the person's job performance and the less likely the employee is to leave the job (Tsai,

Chuang, & Hseih, 2009). Based on their findings, these researchers (Tsai et al., 2009) recommend that

managers create a healthy communication climate by

 Inspiring their employees to accomplish their organizational goals

 Assisting employees in identifying with their companies

 Developing clear conflict management channels

 Cultivating a satisfying system of organizational communication

These suggestions for improving CS in organizations are useful and can be logically expanded to other

contexts. For example, romantic partners can encourage each other to accomplish their goals, help each

other identify with groups that are important and relevant to them, better manage how they engage in

conflict with each other, and create a relationship environment that is constructive and beneficial for

both partners. Hecht's (1978) measure of interpersonal communication satisfaction is found in the Self-

Test feature, and you can use this to assess your own levels of CS.

Self-Assessment

Hecht's Interpersonal Communication Satisfaction Inventory

The purpose of this self-test is to examine your reactions to a recent conversation. Select a conversation

that you have had with someone in the last day or so—it can be one that you had face-to-face, online, or

a combination of both channels.

There are a total of 19 statements for you to review.

1. My partner let me know that I was communicating effectively.

strongly disagree

disagree

undecided

agree

strongly agree

2. Nothing was accomplished.

strongly disagree

disagree

undecided

agree

strongly agree

3. I would like to have another conversation like this one.

strongly disagree

disagree

undecided

agree

strongly agree

4. My partner genuinely wanted to get to know me.

strongly disagree

disagree

undecided

agree

strongly agree

5. I was very dissatisfied with the conversation.

strongly disagree

disagree

undecided

agree

strongly agree

6. I had something else to do.

strongly disagree

disagree

undecided

agree

strongly agree

Communication Competence Communication competence has been an important thread throughout this text—one that sews

together the different aspects and contexts of communication, as well as offering an easy-to-implement

pattern that can be used in different communication situations to create successful outcomes. Recall

from Chapters 1 and 2 that communication competence involves being both effective—obtaining what

you seek or accomplishing your goals—and appropriate—following the rules and expectations of others

regarding a particular situation or interaction. Improving your communication competence also means

that you must possess necessary knowledge or awareness about how to communicate competently, be

motivated or energized to do so, and be skilled at or capable of encoding competent messages. Thus,

being knowledgeable, motivated, and skilled can help make you more effective and appropriate in your

interactions with others.

These communication competence concepts have been successfully applied to a variety of

communication contexts and situations. For example, Brian Spitzberg (2006) proposed a series of

relationships between communication competence concepts in online and mediated contexts. For

example, much as in face-to-face contexts, knowledge in mediated contexts is positively associated with

motivation. Having both knowledge and motivation also means you are likely to be more skilled in

mediated interactions. In other words, if you know the basics of how to use social networks such as

Facebook and Twitter, and are interested in being a member of these social networks, you are likely to

visit them and use such networks more frequently, which then will make you a more adept social

network user. Knowledge, motivation, and skill are each then positively related to a variety of computer-

mediated competence-related outcomes, such as appropriateness, effectiveness, relationship and

communication satisfaction, increased attractiveness, and the ability to develop relationships (Spitzberg,

2006). In essence, the more one knows about and participates in social networking, the better the

person is at it and the more communication and relationship benefits that the person accrues.

Health communication is another example context. Gary Kreps (1988) advocated for a model of

relational health interaction that would promote patient and provider communication competence in

order to improve the quality of care and increase both patient and provider satisfaction. How individuals

in an interaction communicate about health at the interpersonal level is significant because this is when

meaningful relationships between healthcare consumers and providers are formed (Kreps, 1988). Kreps

emphasizes the importance of effective communication in health interactions in part because more

effective patient-provider communication is related to greater patient compliance with provider

treatments. In addition, realistic and fulfilled patient expectations during interactions contribute to

decreased cultural stereotyping and greater clarification of roles and needs (Kreps, 1988). Subsequent

research has supported Krepp's (1988) model, finding, for example, that the communication

competence of healthcare workers was directly related to their increased social support and decreased

stress (Wright, Banas, Bessarabova, & Bernard, 2010).

Having the knowledge, motivation, and skill to be communicatively competent allows an individual to

create better outcomes and have greater success in a variety of specific communication contexts.

Retake the communication competence survey in the Self-Test feature, first provided in Chapter 2, and

compare your updated scores to your scores from Chapter 2. Now that you are almost done reading this

text, has your competence has changed?

11.2 Setting and Managing Expectations for Various Contexts At the end of each chapter in this text, we offered strategies for creating and managing your

expectations about how you will communicate with others. Though these suggestions are tailored to the

specific context or situation covered in each chapter, these strategies present three overarching

strategies:

 Be more aware of and analyze how you communicate to increase understanding of your and

others' messages.

 Practice the knowledge and skills that you are acquiring in this course in your own interactions

in order to increase your communication competence.

 Consider how others see you and how their perceptions and messages shape who you are and

how you communicate.

Together, these general suggestions ask you to identify and think about your own motivations and

messages, as well as those of the people with whom you communicate, and work to apply the

information from this course to your own interactions. These suggestions require that you have the

ability to reflect upon an interaction and to be flexible when communicating in order to successfully

adapt to a specific communication situation. Both abilities can be used to help you determine what you

can expect and can hope to accomplish from an interaction. (The Web Field Trip feature offers some

practical tips on conversing competently.)

WEB FIELD TRIP

Conversational Work

In an article for The Chronicle of Higher Education (http://chronicle.com/section/Home/5), English

professor Anne Curzan comments on a recent course in which she teaches undergraduates about how

conversations work. Over the term, she and her students come to the conclusion that conversations

take practice—that conversations are work. Communicators need to consider several different aspects

of the conversation as a whole, and they must both make an effort. Search for and then review Curzan's

article, "The Work of Conversation," paying particular attention to the different forms of conversation

work. Now take a moment to consider the following critical thinking questions.

Critical Thinking Questions

17. Which form(s) of conversational work (e.g., asking questions, listening actively and attentively)

do you think that you are most adept at? Which form(s) require a bit more effort for you? How

has this class assisted you in working harder at conversation?

18. The end of the article implies that meaningful conversation takes place via face-to-face

channels. Is meaningful conversation also possible via mediated channels? If so, how do we

accomplish this?

Be a More Mindful Communicator What does it mean to be mindful? According to psychology professor Ellen Langer (1989, p. 138),

mindfulness is defined as "a state of alertness and lively awareness" in which an individual consciously

focuses on and processes information and cues derived from the present situation to determine how to

act. In other words, a mindful person is alert to a particular situation or context and takes cues from

what is going on at that moment, in that environment (as opposed to previous situations or

experiences), to help him or her figure out how to behave. In this way, a mindful individual can consider

multiple perspectives and differentiate between various pieces of information and categories (Langer,

1989), and thus has cognitive flexibility (Canary, Lakey, & Sillars, 2013). In contrast, mindlessness occurs

when there is "a state of reduced attention" and minimal processing of information (Langer, 1989. p.

139). A person who is in a mindless state does not pay attention to the current situation; rather, he or

she draws almost entirely on past experiences when deciding how to act. Langer's research has

demonstrated that being mindful is important because it positively contributes to individuals' physical

health, reduces organizational burnout and job turnover, and encourages more creative thinking in

educational settings (Langer & Moldoveanu, 2000).

Being more mindful, or less mindless, can also help us be more competent and successful

communicators. Mindless actions are, according to Langer (1989), frequently rigid and governed by

rules. Mindless people behave and communicate based on their first and usually only assessment of the

situation, and such people are also typically unwilling to consider alternative options or courses of

action. In contrast, when people are mindful, they can identify both their own and their partners'

thoughts and feelings, can express their cognitions and emotions clearly, and are sensitive to what their

partner is thinking and feeling during an interaction (Canary et al., 2013). The ideas generated in

interactions where individuals are mindful are often specific and detailed. Mindful individuals are also

more responsive to an interaction that is taking place at that moment, meaning they are less judgmental

about what is being said and that the interaction thus flows more smoothly (Canary et al., 2013).

It is no surprise then that mindfulness is associated with greater marital adjustment, a greater ability to

be empathic and take other people's perspectives, and a decreased use of hostile expressions of anger

and aggressive behaviors (Wachs & Cordova, 2007). Individuals who are more mindful also respond

more constructively to distress in their relationships, engage in better quality communication, and

experience more relationship satisfaction (Barnes, Brown, Krusemark, Campbell, & Rogge, 2007).

Mindfulness is also important in healthcare interactions; according to researchers, patients may

mindfully consider their healthcare needs and decide to not follow a provider's treatment

recommendations; this is called mindful nonadherence (Brashers, Naas, & Neidig, 1999).

Ryan McVay/Photodisc/Thinkstock

A mindful communicator takes cues from what is going on in the moment to help figure out how to best

behave in an interaction.

To illustrate, let's imagine a situation from both a mindful and a mindless perspective. Jackie and Joe are

recent hires at a biotech company and are both navigating through their first day of work, which consists

of a companywide orientation for recent hires. Both employees are nervous, but Joe attempts to be

mindful when approaching this situation. He plans ahead to determine where the office is located,

leaves at a specific time in order to arrive at the company headquarters early, and pays attention to his

surroundings. Once there, he watches how the other new hires behave and interact with one another.

During a question and answer session, he asks the event organizer a question that is reflective,

thoughtful, and based on the information that he has learned thus far. Joe's mindful consideration of his

first day with a new company has thus allowed him to understand how his current situation is distinct

from previous, similar ones he has had in other employment settings.

Jackie, in contrast, approaches her first day mindlessly. She pays little attention to the surroundings, and

gets lost on her way to the office, making her late for the orientation. She pays no attention to the other

new hires, assuming this job will be just like every other job. When she asks a question, it is because she

has not closely listened during the different presentations. Jackie is thus behaving based on her previous

work experiences and is not attuned to the one she is currently in, even though it is new and unfamiliar.

Approaching our communication with others mindfully—particularly when the interaction is new,

important, or potentially challenging—can help you set and meet your communication expectations and

be more competent. As you can see, approaching a new job the way that Joe mindfully does helps him

learn more about his new company and coworkers, and it also helps him better understand the role that

he will have in the organization. In contrast, Jackie's mindlessness means that she has to continually

focus on basic information and questions, which prevents her from gaining a broader sense of her role

at the biotech company. Thus it is best, and most beneficial, to approach new, unfamiliar situations in a

mindful way.

Be a Communication Chameleon You will have the greatest chance of enhancing your communication success if you become something

of a communication chameleon. A chameleon is an animal that is extremely attuned to its environment,

to the point where a chameleon can adapt to its surroundings by physically changing colors. Chameleons

are also able to look at two different objects at the same time because they have eyes that rotate

independently and offer a 360-degree view. Chameleons are flexible: The species can live in many

different environments, including the rainforest, desert, savannas, and the mountains. Basically, a

chameleon survives and thrives because it can observe its surroundings from different perspectives and

because it can quickly adapt to the situation.

You can be a communication chameleon by assessing a specific situation and recognizing how to shift

your communication to best fit the expectations for each unique situation. This means that you can

recognize, for example, that you will communicate differently in a business and professional situation

than you will on a first date. Further, you will know exactly how to adapt to each of those situations in

ways that increase your chances that your interaction will create shared meaning and be satisfying and

competent for both you and your partner. (Everyday Communication Challenges offers information on

basic communication skills.)

EVERYDAY COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES

Basic Communication Skills

When communication researchers talk about being a more skilled communicator or being more

communicatively competent, they often talk broadly about being appropriate, meeting expectations,

and having knowledge and motivation. But how exactly does this translate to how we should behave

when interacting with others? Communication scholars have attempted to answer this question by

making the leap from research to practice. These researchers have developed specific guidelines for the

skills that individuals should strive for when communicating. For example, Rebecca Rubin and Sherwyn

Morreale (2000) compiled basic and advanced core competencies that college students need to master

in order to be effective communicators. Rubin and Morreale define basic communication skills as the

minimal competencies that represent the knowledge, attitudes, and abilities needed to function

effectively in business and professional settings and in society in general.

Regarding interpersonal communication, the following list summarizes the important basic skills

identified by Rubin and Morreale (2000):

Analyzing the situation, which includes:

 Recognizing when another communicator does not understand a message

 Identifying and managing misunderstanding

 Knowing when it is appropriate and inappropriate to say something

Managing relationships, which involves:

 Managing interpersonal conflict

 Being open to others' conflicting views

 Asserting ourselves effectively

Exchanging information, which includes:

 Listening and being attentive to others' comments and questions

 Asking questions effectively

 Answering questions in a concise manner

 Providing directions that are correct and concise

Managing conversations, which involves:

 Being open-minded about others' viewpoints

 Conveying enthusiasm by how we deliver messages

Look over this list and think about which specific behaviors you are most skillful at when you

communicate. Then consider the following questions.

Critical Thinking Questions

19. Which behaviors do you still need to work on?

20. How can using these specific behaviors in interpersonal interactions help you to be more

competent in your communication?

21. How has this text assisted in your understanding and enactment of these skillful actions?

11.3 Strategically Managing Difficult Interactions

liannelin/iStock/Thinkstock

Competent and mindful communication is particularly important in difficult or challenging interactions

such as conflicts.

As we have seen throughout this text, we often encounter multiple challenges and difficulties when we

interact with others. Most are minor, such as a misunderstanding between friends that requires that you

provide more information to clarify your message. Others are frequent but fleeting, such as a minor lie

that can protect your relationship with your boss at work or a brief spat with your romantic partner

about whose turn it is to do the dishes. Others are even less frequent but have the potential to

negatively affect how we communicate and can even jeopardize the quality or existence of a

relationship, such as jealousy when you discover that your romantic partner is spending a great deal of

time with a potential romantic rival.

Competent and mindful communication is particularly important in these challenging interpersonal

situations, but it is often more difficult to actually enact competence and mindfulness in such situations.

Our emotions—especially anger and stress—can take over in these situations, causing emotional

flooding that encourages us to act impulsively and prevents us from thinking and responding rationally

(Gottman, 1994a). Challenging interactions—such as engaging in conflict, finding out that our partner

has lied to us, or expressing our jealousy—are thus common situations where individuals can lose

control and are less mindful of their messages and potential consequences.

So how do we face these challenges in a competent and mindful way? Interpersonal communication

researchers Daniel Canary, Sandra Lakey, and Alan Sillars (2013) have created a method for strategically

managing conflict that can also be applied to other difficult interactions. Canary and his colleagues

(2013) argue that their method of strategically managing communication challenges is significant for

three reasons:

22. It encourages individuals to adopt an ethical code of conduct when interacting with others.

23. It discourages and preempts the aggressive or violent behaviors that can sometimes arise.

24. It contributes to increased relationship satisfaction, a more stable and longer-lasting

relationship, and positive relationship outcomes, such as increased trust and cooperation.

The next few sections will examine Canary and his colleagues' (2013) strategic management method in

more detail. Overall, the method involves four forms of control: episode, personal, attributional, and

goal.

Episode Control The first important way to strategically manage challenging interactions is to anticipate how you will

respond in difficult situations (Canary et al., 2013). The form is referred to as episode control, in which

you can exercise influence over situations because you are more mindful in anticipation of them. If you

know that particular issues or situations are triggers for you and will cause you to overreact or become

emotionally flooded when you discuss them, you can anticipate the negative reactions and be more

mindful about how you respond. This mindfulness, in turn, can give you pause when you are in an actual

situation. You can use this spare moment to anticipate your own responses and then curb the less

desirable reactions. This premeditation can prevent you from unnecessarily taking out your frustrations

on people who are not directly involved in the situation.

Personal Control The second way to be more strategically competent in challenging situations is to have faith that your

efforts at being competent can have an impact. Two concepts that illustrate our power to make a

difference are locus of control and efficacy. First, locus of control (LoC) is the extent to which we believe

we are responsible for what happens to us. Having an internal LoC means that we take responsibility for

our own actions, both positive and negative, and that outcomes are due to our abilities and the effort

we put forth. In contrast, an external LoC puts the onus of responsibility on forces outside of us, such as

when we say that something occurs due to chance or fate, or is caused by someone or something that

we cannot control. Second, when a person feels that they have efficacy, they believe they can

successfully control or manage a situation such as a challenging or difficult interaction. Clearly, having

more of an internal LoC contributes to feeling greater efficacy when in a particular situation.

In terms of Canary and colleagues' (2013) strategic management method, LoC and efficacy are both

parts of personal control, or the belief that difficult interactions can be competently managed and

translated into positive outcomes. Recognizing that you have personal control is helpful, because it can

empower you to try to guide how the difficult interaction unfolds. Try not to blame others or be a

victim: These behaviors show that you do not believe that you have personal control over the situation.

Another benefit of having personal control is that it will assist you in considering which messages will be

more likely to create productive outcomes. Potentially productive messages include exchanging

information, working to solve problems, and being cooperative and direct. Canary and colleagues (2013)

note that "believing that one can negotiate with a high probability of success is a critically important

component" to competently managing challenging interactions (p. 270).

Attributional Control The third way that we can strategically manage difficult interactions in a more competent manner

involves how these situations are interpreted by the parties who are involved. Canary and colleagues

(2013) note that we make attributions, or explanations and reasons about what events mean and how

they unfold and about who is responsible. A willingness to accept the appropriate amount of

responsibility for your role in the situation will help you communicate in a more cooperative way. In

turn, the refusal to take responsibility is associated with more defensive and protective messages.

Attributional control, which involves individuals generating explanations and attributions that do not

simply blame the partner and that assume responsibility for the situation, can increase the possibility

that the result of the challenging interaction will be constructive. Canary and colleagues (2013) argue

that mindfulness can help individuals generate more potential attributions for their partners' behaviors.

This then enables the individual to delve into deeper and more complex explanations for the situation.

Goal Control The fourth way that we can strategically manage difficult interactions in a more competent manner is to

better understand what we want to get out of an interaction when we communicate. A goal is an

objective that an individual seeks to achieve, and goals are important when we communicate with

others. In fact, most communication is goal-directed, which means we have an objective in mind when

we interact with others, and we communicate in a way that best allows us to accomplish this objective.

We might not always be conscious of our goals, however; we can (and often do) communicate without

conscious awareness of goals, but we are later able to clearly identify our goals if someone asks us what

we wished to accomplish in a particular interaction. Goals help guide communication. Specifically, they

 Help us determine how, why, when, whether, and to whom we should communicate

 Give us standards against which to assess our interaction outcomes

 Give our interactions meaning

 Help us understand and interpret others' messages (Canary et al., 2013; Dillard, 1990).

It is for these reasons that goal control is an important element of mindful communication. Goal control

is the extent to which a communicator knows what he or she wants, as well as being aware of and

sensitive to his or her interaction partner's goals (Canary et al., 2013). In essence, goal control involves

being mindful about your goals because you must be aware of and thoughtfully consider what you hope

to achieve ahead of time and as the interaction unfolds. Goal control thus increases your chances of

communication success.

Together, the four forms of control help you create positive and helpful messages when you are in a

difficult interaction. They can also increase the likelihood that you will view your partner's

communication through a more positive lens. In essence, the ultimate goal is to control your

communication strategies in a way that contributes to the use of more compromising and cooperative

messages (Canary et al., 2013). The next sections will discuss the importance of goals and plans in

interpersonal communications situations. (IPC in the Digital Age offers some tips on mindful behaviors

when multitasking.)

IPC IN THE DIGITAL AGE

Mindfulness and Media Multitasking

The growth of accessible media and channels of communication in the last 20 years has opened up a

whole host of new ways for us to relate to one another and has allowed us to be more connected than

ever before. This also means there are more reasons and ways to multitask, or juggle and switch

between more than one task at the same time. For example, you can check your Facebook page while e-

mailing a work colleague and carry on a conversation with your roommate at the same time. But does

our increased ability to multitask mean that we are less mindful in these interactions? In other words,

are we so used to spreading our attention thin when we multitask that we don't fully concentrate on

any of the interactions in which we are involved?

Amanda Ie, Chiara Haller, Ellen Langer, and Delphine Courvoisier (2012), psychology researchers at

Harvard University, conducted a study to determine if multitasking while using different forms of media

such as television and the Internet is related to mindful flexibility, or the ability to inherently know that

a problem or issue can be considered from a variety of viewpoints or perspectives. In other words,

mindful flexibility "assumes that there is no absolute, optimal fit between problem and solution" (Ie et

al., 2012, p. 1526); rather, individuals should brainstorm and consider different options. To examine this

potential relationship, Ie and her colleagues (2012) asked their participants to complete measures of

how mindful they were and then take part in a multitasking exercise that involved them writing an essay

and solving anagram puzzles that were provided to them via an online chat program. The researchers

found that younger individuals and those for whom mindfulness was an enduring personality trait

performed well on the multitasking exercise. The researchers explained that younger participants may

be more adept at multitasking because they have grown up with and become accustomed to the

different forms of technology that we use every day (Ie et al., 2012). Apply these findings to your own

communication, and then consider the following questions. Though multitasking is a common and

sometimes even expected practice today, think about how it might reduce your ability to fully

concentrate on, and be mindful of, each of the tasks and interactions in which you participate.

Critical Thinking Questions

25. Do you consider yourself to be a mindful person?

26. Do you think that how consistently mindful you are relates to how well you multitask?

27. Do the different media that you use to multitask (e.g., Internet, texting, talking face-to-face)

impact how mindful or focused you are about each task that you are working on?

11.4 Creating, Evaluating, and Reevaluating Goals and Plans for

Competent Communication

XiXinXing/Thinkstock

If you are attracted to someone, your goal might be to build a relationship, and your initial plan for

accomplishing the goal might be to strike up a conversation. But goals and plans are not static—shifts

may occur as a result of interactions.

As we saw earlier in this chapter, mindfulness is a very useful technique for engaging in effective and

appropriate interactions. Specifically, one way to practice mindfulness is to establish what you wish to

accomplish in an interaction and then identify how you can achieve such goals. But how do we

accomplish our communication goals? The most important thing we can do is create plans that help us

achieve our interaction goals. Plans emerge directly from goals and can help an individual determine

what actions or messages they should use to accomplish a particular goal (Canary et al., 2013). Plans, in

other words, are the essential link between your goals, which are internal to you and involve your

thoughts and feelings, and how you communicate to the external world.

For example, imagine that you are attracted to someone who frequents the same coffee shop as you do.

Your goal in this situation would be to build a relationship with that person. The plan that you would

employ to accomplish that goal might be to strike up a conversation one afternoon to gauge the

person's potential interest in you or to ask him or her out on a date. You would then use communication

to follow through with your plan. This communication might include sitting at an adjacent table one day

and striking up a conversation about the book he or she is reading. As you talk, you are likely evaluating

how he or she responds to you. Does the person seem interested in what you say? Or does he or she

seem distracted and spend most of the time checking his or her phone or continuing to read the book?

As this interaction continues, your goals will likely change. Perhaps your initial goal was to determine if

the person was interested in you, but once you accomplish this goal you might move on to your next

goal: asking the person to spend time together in a different environment. Or, if the person is clearly not

interested in you, you may shift gears to get out of the interaction as quickly as possible and avoid

embarrassment. Thus, your goals and plans are not static; they are dynamic and malleable in response

to the messages exchanged between communicators. This means that goal control and being mindful

involves creating goals and plans before an interaction and then evaluating and reassessing these goals

and plans during and after the interaction.

Based on what you have learned in this text, you have four essential goals to becoming a competent

communicator:

28. Focus on competence

29. Emphasize empathy

30. Decrease communication apprehension

31. Control verbal abuse and aggression

Achieving these goals in your interpersonal interactions requires knowledge, motivation, and skill. When

you employ clear and mindful plans that carry out these goals, you have an increased chance of being

both effective—accomplishing specific goals via mindfully constructed plans—and appropriate. Further,

these strategies are relevant to and useful in a variety of interpersonal communication contexts and

situations, including close relationships, business and professional settings, mediated channels, and

challenging interpersonal interactions.

Focusing on Communication Competence We have emphasized the importance of communication competence throughout this text. Your decision

to read this text indicates that you are motivated to become a more competent and skilled

communicator. Learning more about interpersonal communication in general and communication

competence in particular can enhance your communication skill. Make use of the easy-to-implement

strategies provided at the end of each chapter, techniques based on research findings from

communication experts; these can help you develop and hone your communication skills. You can

implement such skills and abilities in different contexts, which suggests that focusing on competence

can offer you greater flexibility and success in your interactions, no matter what the topic of

conversation or the communication partner. Thus, competence is the first goal to focus on if you want

to be a more effective and appropriate communicator.

Emphasizing Empathy In Chapter 8, we discussed empathy, or putting yourself in another person's shoes, as an important way

to maintain our interpersonal relationships. Empathic communication is also a component of competent

communication (Query & Kreps, 1996; Wiemann, 1977). Indeed, Rubin and Morreale (2000) note that

feeling and conveying empathy is a helpful communication technique when individuals want to relate to

others. Developing a capacity to be empathic is also a recommended training intervention in individual

and couples' therapy (Block-Lerner, Adair, Plumb, Rhatigan, & Orsillo, 2007). Further, when healthcare

workers were more empathic at work, they experienced lower stress and reduced job burnout (Wright

et al., 2010).

Empathy is also related to mindfulness. Karen Wachs and James Cordova (2007) explain that

mindfulness promotes empathy in three ways:

32. Mindful individuals are receptive and open about their own experiences and curious about the

experiences of others.

33. Mindful individuals are less distracted by their own thoughts and experiences and thus devote

more attention to others' perspectives.

34. Mindful individuals are receptive to other experiences and perspectives and thus become more

compassionate and empathic.

More specifically empathy is positively related to mindfulness, the ability to take different perspectives,

and the ability to control one's anger and aggression (Wachs & Cordova, 2007). Empathy is thus an

important goal to pursue when you communicate with others; be willing to take others' perspectives

and engage in active listening, consciously making an effort to hear and comprehend what the other

person is saying.

Decreasing Communication Apprehension As we discussed in Chapter 5 communication apprehension is a very common barrier to skillful and

competent communication. Recall that communication apprehension (CA) is fear and anxiety

experienced either during or before communication situations (McCroskey, 1977). In Chapter 5, we

noted that CA can be a relatively stable personality trait. However, you can work to reduce your CA in

three ways:

35. Be aware of how apprehensive you are and whether you have more or less apprehension in

different situations or interactions.

36. Seek out opportunities to learn and practice communication skills.

37. For more serious instances of CA, reach out to others for help.

If you feel that your communication apprehension creates unwanted challenges or that it gets in the

way of competent communication, items 1 and 2 listed above may help. Specifically, we hope that this

text provides you with the information that you need to identify your CA levels and the skills that you

need to feel confident as you embark on communication opportunities that allow you to learn and

practice those skills. In the Self-Test feature, we provide the CA self-test that first appeared in Chapter 5

so you can reassess your current levels of CA and compare the results.

SELF-TEST

Personal Report of Communication Apprehension

This instrument, often referred to as the PRCA-24, is composed of 24 statements concerning feelings

about communicating with others. Please indicate the degree to which each statement applies to you:

1 for strongly disagree

2 for disagree

3 for neutral

4 for agree

5 for strongly agree

38. I dislike participating in group discussions.

39. Generally, I am comfortable while participating in group discussions.

40. I am tense and nervous while participating in group discussions.

41. I like to get involved in group discussions.

42. Engaging in a group discussion with new people makes me tense and nervous.

43. I am calm and relaxed while participating in group discussions.

44. Generally, I am nervous when I have to participate in a meeting.

45. Usually, I am comfortable when I have to participate in a meeting.

46. I am very calm and relaxed when I am called upon to express an opinion at a meeting.

47. I am afraid to express myself at meetings.

48. Communicating at meetings usually makes me uncomfortable.

49. I am very relaxed when answering questions at a meeting.

50. While participating in a conversation with a new acquaintance, I feel very nervous.

51. I have no fear of speaking up in conversations.

52. Ordinarily, I am very tense and nervous in conversations.

53. Ordinarily, I am very calm and relaxed in conversations.

54. While conversing with a new acquaintance, I feel very relaxed.

55. I'm afraid to speak up in conversations.

56. I have no fear of giving a speech.

57. Certain parts of my body feel very tense and rigid while giving a speech.

58. I feel relaxed while giving a speech.

59. My thoughts become confused and jumbled when I am giving a speech.

60. I face the prospect of giving a speech with confidence.

61. While giving a speech, I get so nervous I forget facts I really know.

Scoring

Group discussion: 18 − (scores for items 2, 4, & 6) + (scores for items 1, 3, & 5)

Meetings: 18 − (scores for items 8, 9, & 12) + (scores for items 7, 10, & 11)

Dyadic: 18 − (scores for items 14, 16, & 17) + (scores for items 13, 15, & 18)

Public speaking: 18 − (scores for items 19, 21, & 23) + (scores for items 20, 22, & 24)

Group discussion score: ___________

Dyadic score: ___________

Meetings score: ___________

Public speaking score: ___________

To obtain your total score for the PRCA, simply add your sub-scores together: ___________

Scores can range from 24–120. Scores below 51 represent people who have very low CA. Scores

between 51–80 represent people with average CA. Scores above 80 represent people who have high

levels of trait CA.

Norms for the PRCA-24

The following norms are based on over 40,000 college students. Data from over 3,000 nonstudent adults

in a national sample provided virtually identical norms, within 0.20 for all scores.

Mean Standard Deviation

High Low

Total 65.6 15.3 > 80 < 51

Group 15.4 4.8 > 20 < 11

Meeting 16.4 4.2 > 20 < 13

Dyad 14.2 3.9 > 18 < 11

Public speaking 19.3 5.1 > 24 < 14

Source: Self-test from McCroskey, J. (1982). Introduction to rhetorical communication (4th ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Printed and electronically reproduced by permission of Pearson

Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

Consider Your Results

62. Did your score change? If so, did it increase or decrease?

63. If you have a lower communication apprehension score now than you previously did, what from

this course might have contributed to you feeling less apprehensive and fearful about your

communication with others?

64. How did you integrate information from this course and text into your own interactions?

Controlling Verbal Abuse and Aggression

Jevtic/iStock/Thinkstock

Verbal aggression can be damaging to both individuals in an interaction and can harm the relationship.

Competent communicators think critically before speaking or acting, using the moment to evaluate how

their messages may affect others.

One of the major challenges that we can face in interpersonal communication is verbal abuse and

aggression, which we described as a "dark side" communication behavior in Chapter 9. Verbal abuse

occurs when words are used to threaten or harm another person. Verbal aggression is a specific form of

verbal abuse that involves attacking who an individual is as a person rather than his or her position on

an issue (Infante, 1987). Verbal aggression and abuse can occur in person or online, in the form of

cyberbullying. Consider again the scenario presented at the beginning of this chapter: Kim and Pat's

conversation could have continued in a less competent way if Kim had called Pat selfish. If this had

escalated and Kim had threatened to break up with Pat for not listening to her, this would be a clear

example of verbal aggression.

Verbal aggression is an incompetent way to communicate because it is damaging to both individuals in

an interaction and the relationship that they share; it can also teach observers, such as children, that it is

an acceptable way to act (Wigley, 2008). However, Charles Wigley (2008) notes that there is one

important method that can minimize verbally aggressive behaviors: learn more constructive arguing

techniques via communication skills training. This training can encourage individuals to communicate

based on critical thinking rather than irrational emotional responses. Indeed, across different studies,

being trained in communication courses such as argumentation and public speaking and taking part in

activities such as debate and forensics significantly increased individuals' critical thinking skills (Allen,

Berkowitz, Hunt, & Louden, 1999). Encouraging individuals to think about how what they are saying

might hurt their interpersonal relationships, or at least make them more aware of the impact of their

aggression, is an additional method for reducing verbally aggressive and abusive behaviors (Wigley,

2008). Critical thinking and considerate message use are also important and helpful techniques for those

who wish to become competent communicators.

Summary and Resources In this chapter, we bring together information from throughout the text that will help you become a

more successful and competent communicator. We discussed three ways to evaluate an interaction as

either successful or unsuccessful. First, we must create shared meaning with the other communicator,

such that you both mutually understand and agree upon what is being discussed. Second, we can use

satisfaction with the communication to assess overall communication success. An important part of

communication success, and thus communication satisfaction, is learning to consider the other

communicator's perspective in the interaction. Third, your sense of communication competence will

also help you gauge whether or not your interaction was successful.

How can you set and manage communication expectations across interactions? The strategies that we

offer at the end of each chapter generally suggest that being aware of your and others' communication,

practicing the knowledge and skills you have learned from this text, and considering others' perceptions

of you in relation to how you communicate will be beneficial. They can also help you be a more flexible

communicator and help you adapt to specific communication situations, much like a chameleon would.

Mindfulness can also help you set and manage expectations about your interactions with others.

When faced with challenging communication situations, it is important to try to stave off emotional

flooding. In addition, you can strategically manage difficult interactions by engaging in episode,

personal, attributional, and goal control, which can result in more competent communication. These

forms of control can help you be more mindful and communicate in a more constructive and

compromising way.

Forming communication goals and plans that we can use to accomplish those goals are also important

tools for competent communicators. Four specific goals can be used to increase communication

competence. First, focus on the mechanics of competence. Second, emphasize empathy by considering

the situation from others' viewpoints. Third, work to decrease your communication apprehension so

that it is at a level that doesn't inhibit your communication. Fourth and finally, control verbally abusive

and aggressive messages by being a more critical thinker and considering how what you communicate

can impact your relationship with the other person.

Chapter 11 Flashcards

Key Terms Click on each key term to see the definition.

attributional control

attributions

basic communication skills

communication satisfaction (CS)

efficacy

emotional flooding

episode control

goal

goal control

intergroup communication

locus of control (LoC)

mindful flexibility

mindfulness

mindlessness

personal control

perspective-taking

plans

Critical Thinking and Discussion Questions 65. Consider a recent conversation you had that you feel went well. Why do you think the

conversation was successful? Is creating shared meaning, communication satisfaction, or

communication competence most important and why? Does your evaluation of an interaction

depend on who you are talking to, what is being discussed, and/or the context in which it is

taking place?

66. Think about a difficult interaction you have recently been involved in. How did the four types of

control—episode, personal, attributional, and goal—fit into this interaction? How might

exercising these types of control make a similar interaction go more smoothly in the future?

67. When you communicate with others, how conscious are you of your goals and plans? How can

being more mindful of your goals and how they are related to communication help you be a

more competent and successful communicator?

68. Based on your self-test results from this and earlier chapters, are you comfortable with your

current levels of communication competence and communication apprehension? If not, how

might you continue to work on your communication to get to a place where you are satisfied

with your communication with others?

69. Consider the text as a whole. How do you think your interpersonal communication has changed

as a result of what you have learned? What information have you taken away from this content

that you can continue to apply in your own interpersonal interactions?