PSYC1100 Communications Final

Models of communication

• Linear

• Interactional

• Transactional

• Westley & Maclean’s

• Dance’s Helical Spiral

Linear communication meaning

• Made my Claude Shannon + Warren Weaver

• Sender → Message → Channel (how it’s sent) →Receiver

• Note about environmental noise that can hinder the message

Interactional communiction meaning

• extends on linear, how it involves interaction + noise

• how one person can send a message, and the receiver can send one back

• made by David Berlo

Transactional communication meaning

• extends on interactional, how people can be both the receiver and sender (”game of tennis”)

• developed by Barnlund

Westley & Maclean’s communication style meaning

• sees channel controlling how the message is received, like a gatekeeper → serving its own function (email vs tiktok)

• also takes into account environmental factors can play

  • sensory experiences

  • object of orientation (sender characteristics)

  • object of orientation (receiver orientation)

Dance’s Helical Spiral meaning

• that communication is never-ending spiral

  • how when we’re kids, we have limited vocab, until we grow up and convos spiral

  • same for intimacy, when small talk with strangers → chats with frieds

  • illustrates the complexity

Goleman’s 5 dimensions of Emotional Intelligence

• Self-awareness

• Self-regulation

• Motivation

• Empathy

• Social Skills

Self-awareness meaning

capacity to understand own emotion

Self-regulation meaning

capacity to regulate own emotion

Motivation meaning

capacity for learning

Empahty meaning

capacity to understand others

Social skills meaning

capacity to effectively interact with others

Mayer, Caruso, and Salovey four brances of emotional intelligence

• Perceiving emotion

• Assimilating emotion

• Understanding emotion

  • Managing emotion

Study by Troth, Jordan, and Lawrence

• had people work in groups

• measured EQ with four-dimension scale (mayer, Caruso, and Salovey)

• had team members’ rate each other’s

  • communication effectiveness

  • communication appropriateness

    • and also how well team worked together (team cohesion)

• people on higher EQ rated more effective + appropriate communicators

  • but only communication effectivenss affected team cohesion

Benefits of EQ

• relationship satisfactions for both partners

• job performance and satisfaction

• clinical competence in health practitioners

Evidence that EQ is not fixed

can be increased via training

Measures of IQ is not perfect,

• Roberts and colleagues asked if EQ really measured EQ

• found subscales were inconsistently related of Mayer, Caruso, and Salovey’s measures

• EQ is related to life satisfaction if you consider other life factors (like personality [OCEAN])

Social Skills meaning

ability to navigate social environments and build relationships with others

Ronald Riggio 7 Categoies of Social Skills

• Emotional expressivity

• Emotional Sensitivity

• Emotional Control

• Social Expressivity

• Social Sensitivity

• Social Control

• Social Manipulation

Emotional expressivity meaning

able to express one’s attitudes

emotional sensitivity meaning

ability to decode others’ non-verbal communications

emotional control meaning

ability to control what emotions you display

social expressivity meaning

ability to engage others in interaction

social sensitivity meaning

ability to understand others’ verbal communication and what is appropriate

social control meaning

ability to control yourself in social situations

social manipulation meaning

• index of how we skillfully use social skills to manipulate people to achieve an end

  • aka Machiavellianism - for self-benefit

Riggio found skills are distinct, not positively related or related to the same things…

• study had people come into labs and interact with confederates

• then rate participants how likeable

• emotional + social expressivity significantly predicted liking, even after controlling attractiveness of confederates

Communication meaning

• listener defined

  • message means whatever a receiver thinks it does

Reasons why we may find it hard to listen:

• Preoccupation

• Prejudgement

• Reactivity

  • Lack of motivation/Effort

Preccupation meaning

thinking ab ourselves, our own problems, or other idea; can drift off when others are speaking

Prejudgment meaning

thinking what someone else is ab to say, stopping us from actually hearing what they have to say

Reactivity meaning

not listening to words, but for emotional content; sometimes reacting emotion more rather than the message

Lack of motivation/effort meaning

we often aren’t motivated to listen or to put in the effort to listen

Non-listening behaviors

• Pseudolistening

• Monopolizing

• Selective listening

• Defensive listening

• Ambushing

• Literal listening

Pseudolistening meaning

pretend to listen, but actually not and not paying attention (being on phones)

Monopolizing meaning

when focusing on conversation continually on ourselves, rather than our conversation partner ; may use tricks and verbal gymnastics to turn convos back to ourselves

Selective listening meaning

only attending to a fraction o the conversation, we focus on parts we find interesting or are motivated to hear what we want to her

Defensive listening

selectively listening for criticism or hostility; may be looking to take offense; happens when conversing with somebody with opposite views to us

Ambushing meaning

listening for points to attack; looking to criticize what others are saying, also happens when conversing with opposite views person

Literal listening meaning

listen to words said, but not the emotional tone said; leads to misinterpretation

Projection Bias meaning

means when people make assumptions about how others think and feel; but people often incorrectly assume others’ thoughts and feelings mirror their own internal states

• projection coined by Freud- where clients assumed their therapists felt same way clients were thinking

Kenny & Acitelli (2001) - partners’ perceptions of one another are influenced by projection bias

• apparent with surveyed heterosexual couples - if partner thinks relationship is going well, assumes partner feels the same way

• researches also have established that people project a range of thoughts and feelings they have about their relationships onto their partner

  • ex: when people feel less caring and supportive, also assume partner feels same way towards them

  • ex: people in relationships who feel a particular emotion, overestimate the extent to which their partner also feels that emotion

projection bias effect when positive

can improve relationship satisfaction and better outcomes

projection bias when negative

results in relationships dissatisfaction and worse outcomes

women who were more dissatisfied with their body…

• also assumed partner dissatisfied with their body

  • women’s beliefs ab what their partner felt predicted reduced satisfaction in relationship for both them and their partner

larger women did not have partners who were less attracted to them…

• but they assumed they did

  • having this assumption related to reduced satisfaction with their relationship and reduced satisfaction for their partners

better listeners report…

• better academics

• better work success

• better relationships

showing people' we’re listening

• affirmatives (saying okay, great, yup)

• paraphrasing

• active listening - asking questions when appropriate, paraphrasing, and maintaining moderate-high nonverbal cues

Weger, Castle, & Emmett (2010) - best mode of listening

• trained interviewers to respond to participants with either

  • simple acknowledgement (affirmative)

  • paraphrasing

• measured following in participants

  • perceived understanding

  • conversational satisfaction

  • social attention (liking)

• results

  • only had effect on social attraction

  • participants listed wanted to be friends with people who paraphrased them (to sum things up, shows that you were actually listening)

• brought back for another study, once again confederates trained to respond again with affirmatives, advice, and active listening and measured same thing

• participants felt better in advice or active listening paradigm, but specifically participants felt most understood with active listening

rewarding in communication meaning

• talking to others to get rewards, whether objective or psychological

  • people like being rewarded (like praise) and demonstrates listening

  • praise is only good if appropriate and genuine, people who pile on false interested are suspected more and liked less

Reinforcers in communication

• particular form of reward where encourage someone and show them we approve (can be verbal or non verbal)

  • helpful to condition people to like us

Questioning in communication

• close and open questioning

  • closed questions elicit a single piece of info

  • open questions allow for greater elaboration + gain more info

    • depends on the situation what is best

Reflecting meaning

• shows you’re listening, involves:

  • paraphrasing

  • repeating

  • reflecting on some info they have given you

Self-Disclosure meaning

• sharing info about self to others

• can be objective, factual info

• can be info ab our internal thoughts and feelings

Explaining meaning

getting message across clearly, giving info what we think/know/need someone else to do + why we feel and do things

Types of communication skills

• rewarding/reinforcing

• questioning

• reflecting

• self-disclosure

• explaining

social norm meaning

denotes appropriate conduct for individuals and groups

descriptive norms

what people do

injunctive norms

what people ought to do

types of reciporocity

• spontaneous/unspoken

• negotiated

conflict spirals meaning

• arguments start mil, then spin out of control and get more vicious and vehement

  • from Gouldner’s perspective, it is expected as norm of reciprocity at play → we feel driven to harm someone who harms us

Youngs Study (1986) - Norm of reciprocity in conflict

• Had participants sit at a booth

• communicated with another “participant” (confederate - Youngs himself) by pressing buttons

  • asked to work together, and make decisions that would benefit one or either of them

  • gathering points would earn them real money

    • also told if they make mean choices, gain points for themselves as the other loses points

      • could also send threats (just warn) or punishments (actually make mean decisions) to each other

• Young varied his responses

  • frequently vs infrequently threatened

  • small vs large threat

  • small vs large punishment

• Participant’s own threat frequency, threat magnitude, and punishment magnitude were measured

• Results showed that norm of reciprocity is stronger when conflict is high (large threat and punishment)

Paleari, Regalia, and Fincham Study (2010) - Reciprocity in relationships

• 120 heterosexual couples, asked how they dealt with conflict

• measured

  • aggressive behaviour

  • avoidant behaviour

  • effective conflict resolution

  • relationship satisfaction

• if partner reported more aggression or avoidance, other partner also used same tactics

  • leads to worse conflict resolution and worse satisfaction

Park and Antonioni (2007)

• ask 256 dyads (pairs) who were roommates/friends about their conflict resolution skills

• measured:

  • competition (exerting pressure on others)

  • collaboration (finding solution together)

  • avoidance

• results:

  • doing a certain strategy, results in friend/roommate reciprocating the same strategy back more

Alberts Study (1989) - researchng criticisms in partners

• Interviewed couples to describe:

  • a time they criticized their partner

  • a time their partner criticized them

  • when their response was in both cases

  • what they wish their response was

    • behavioral complaints are common

    • happy and well adjusted couples agree with one another more when criticized

    • first responses to criticism is important, denial likely to lead to heated conflict

Techniques to avoid criticisms

• Justify

• Deny

• Counter complain

• Pass

• Agreeing

Justify meaning

provide excuse or explanations, doesn’t deny that criticism is warranted but implies person being criticized should not be held accountable, given extenuating circumstances

Deny meaning

saying criticism is wrong and refusing to engage in it

Counter complain meaning

levelling criticism back at the critic, changing focus

Pass meaning

failing to respond, ignore or avoid criticism

Agreeing meaning

acknowledge criticism, and apologized or made plans to improve

Real, anticipated, or imagined negative feedback leads to…

• guilt, shame, embarrassment, anger, and social anxiety

  • hurts because acts as a face threat (people’s sense of morality, authority, and honor)

positive face threat meaning

hurts things we value, undermine desire to be accepted, threatens relationship face

negative face threat meaning

look bad in front of others, constrains our choices

To make criticism effective:

• use “I” statement

• taking other person’s perspective

• save other person’s face

• privacy of criticism

• tone of criticsm

• clarity of criticism

• authority (qualified” share same issue?)

• motive (necessity? benefit or spite?)

Kubany et al Study (1992) - Using I in criticsm

• teenage participants read critical statements (imagined came from someone else)

• statements varied in whether used “you” or “I”

• felt more anger with you, more supportive with I

Simmons et al (2005) - using “I” in crticism

• coded couple’s conversations (pronouns of “you”, “we”, “I”)

• coded interaction behaviour (positive or negative) + measured marital satisfaction

• “you” → more negative interactions + lower relationship satisfaction, “we” → more positive interaction, “I” → greater relationship satisfaction

Rogers et al study (2018) - taking other person’s perspective

• 253 students read statements which varied on “I” and “you” language + acknowledgement of self & other perspectives vs other perspective vs self perspective vs no acknowledgement

• participants asked to imagine how defensive person targeted by statements would feel

• people won’t be defensive to “I” and self & other perspective acknowledgement

cupach & carson study (2007) - on saving face

• 199 students wrote ab time they were criticized, descriptions coded

• participants rated how much their positive and negative face threatened from criticism

• face threats tended to be associated with worse outcomes, such as anger, anxiety, relationship damage

• also found dispositional complaints perceived as threatening positive face the most (and also more face threat with public criticism)

relational complaint meaning

criticize someone about what they are doing within relationship, or how relationship going

behavioral complaints meaning

criticize someone about something they did, or are doing

dispositional complaints meaning

about who they are as a person

Independent culture

• people see themselves separate

• goal to discover what is unique

• strive for individualism and autonomy

Interdependent culture

• people see themselves in light of social relationships

• social context determines behavior

• described as collectivist/relational

Markus and Kitayama (1991) on cross-cultural criticism…

argued that western cultures have an independent view of self, whereas non-western are more interdependent

Chen et al (2009) on cross-culturalism

• in interdependent cultures though, people see close friends as part of self

  • may be more likely to give benefit of doubt when they behave poorly

• participants from US and China played games where one person allocated money

  • led to believe whether shared money with friend or stranger, and allocated fairly or unfairly (more money to themselves)

  • for Americans, both times refused to be accept deal

  • but for Chinese, with strangers did not accept deal, but moreso with friends

Takeuchi et al (2001) on cross cultures

• Participants from US and Japan, asked to imagine person giving wrong directions to art museum + asked how would express dissatisfaction

  • person was either fellow student or art teacher

• both similar for student, but japanese moreso hide dissatisfaction to save face for student

• huge difference for teacher, japanese more likely to hide dissatisfaction

  • likely from the structured hierarchy

Knutson et al (2003) on conflict in cross-cultures

• compared how people deal with conflict in US vs Thailand

• measured how scored on rhetorical reflection

  • degree to which person is considerate of making others feel uncomfortable, imposing on them, avoiding conflict, etc.

• and also how scored on noble self

  • degree to which person does not back down, tells others what they think

• people in Thailand higher on rhetorical reflection, but Americans higher on noble self

Reisinger & Turner (1998)

• rules of behavior differ between Australian hosts and mandarin speaking tourists

  • relative to aussie hosts, mandarin-speaking tourists value:

    • conforming to etiquette

    • avoiding arguments

    • avoiding talking about sensitive issues

findings on interdependant vs independent cultures

Interdependent cultures more concerned with saving face of other people compared to independent cultures, who were more concerned with saving their own face

Viginette definition

• Short, carefully constructed scenario to study human behaviour

• Serves as a controlled stimulus to evaluate how people respond to specific situations

1965-1975 - Ekhard Hess released paper “Attitude and pupil size”

• Had men peer into sophisticated box with slides projected

  • Camera snapped away and recorded changes in pupil sizes

• Pupils dilated when viewing things they liked

  • Men: female pin-ups, sharks

  • Women: babies, male pin-ups

• Also dilated a lot before constricting when seeing dead bodies

  • suggested dilated when shocked

• And also found they dilated when viewing food

  • more preferred food → greater dilation

• Then hypothesized that people are more attracted to dilated eyes

Kret & De Dreu (2019) - Pupil Dilation and Trust

• Participants played role of “investor”

  • made choice to invest real money with “partner” they thought were playing thru a computer

  • participants told they could double/triple money if partner chooses so

  • before making decision, participant would see their “partner’s” eyes and rated on attractiveness, friendliness, trustworthiness, and also how much to invest

    • manipulated so the pupil wither dilated or constricted while looking at participant

  • participants trusted dilated pupils more, and rated more friendly (and esp pronounced if partner seemed happy)

    • invested more in people with dilated pupil

Kret, Tomonaga, & Matsuzara (2014) - Pupil DIlation Mimicry across species

• Pupil dilation mimicry: dilation/constriction of pupil in response to others’ pupil dilation/constriction

  • evident in humans looking at eyes of other humans

    • evident in chimps looking at eyes of other chimps

James (1932) on Posture

• Showed people photographs containing 347 postured

• Had participants indicate what attitude posture indicated (what part was important?)

• Had model wear mask (as to not influence facial expression)

• four categories

• Most communicative value comes from how we hold our

  • Head

  • Trunk

Four communicative categories of posture

• Approach - attentive posture

• Withdrawal - moving back, interpreted negatively

• Expansion - expanded chest, associated with pride and arrogance

• Contraction - communicates depression or downcast, bowed head and dropping shoulder

Most communicative value comes from how we hold our…

• Head

• Trunk

Machotka (1960s) on nude posture

• Similarly, showed participants nude images of people in different postures

• People with closed arm positions seen as cold, shy, and passive

  • Found that people do cross arms more with people we dislike or lower status

Mehrabian (1968) on posture

we turn shoulders away from people we dislike

Lunn & Mynier (1993) on Server posture and restaurant tipping

• Waiters who squatted next to table = average tip of 6ish

  • signaled intimacy, liking, and friendliness

• Waiter standing = average tip of 5ish