Once one begins to understand the technical terms of interpersonal communication, and realizes that the stakes involved with communication are actually quite high, one is faced with a dilemma: what do I do now? Saying nothing is as full of meaning as saying something: no matter what strategy you choose, no matter how carefully or sloppily you ‘next,’ something is going to happen and whatever you did/didn’t do is inevitably and unavoidably included. Not only does this social fact apply in the direct interpersonal relationship; there is also consequentiality for witnesses. Very little of how we behave in the world escapes the perception of others, how we are is observed.
We watch each other and others watch us. This occurs within our class (as a group in a common situation operating within a particular structure), and it occurs between us and all those other people who are not in the class. For instance, your friends and family, possibly even coworkers, are noticing all kinds of things about you: how you orient yourself to the demands of the task (being a student), to the subject matter itself (learning), to the juggling act you have to perform to balance doing well in this course while still maintaining all your other responsibilities. Because I intentionally create a structure for us to do some of our communicating in public (through the anonymous weblogs), people we do not even know may also pay attention to what we are doing, to what we say and how we say it.
I want you to read a blog entry that I wrote last semester for a more advanced course in interpersonal communication: Introduction to Small Group Dynamics. The entry is titled “Audience: to imagine or ignore.” Assigning this to you to read is a teaching experiment – I suspect that much of the content will be confusing because it is, in practical terms, somebody else’s conversation. The only common participants are myself and John Robison. Read it and do your best to figure out what the conversation is about. (I will link it below – be careful about spending too much time with its internal links – I recommend that you click through just to see what’s there but then resume reading the main entry.)
There is an important implication of the communication theory we are learning that involves the relationship between our talk and social structures. Even though you and I, you and your classmates, you and your family members, you and your friends, and/or you and your co-workers, are having this conversation for the first time, many other people have already had “this” conversation. What we say to each other is, in general, not new in the world. It may be new to us, to me, to you, but as far as humanity is concerned, we are not actually all that special. There have been so many smart people who have struggled with this kind of knowledge, so many wise women and men who confronted these challenges and worked them through, and so many different ways of figuring these things out and saying them. History is full of examples from every culture, each religion, and all imaginable points-of-view. In our time, right now as we live, there are probably (I do mean literally, although my statistical sensibility is weak) some millions of people who understand that they are using a particular skill (we could even call it a communication technology) called ‘nexting’ as a communication tool to change our world (think globally!)
The point is that we are always and forever joining conversations in the middle, and there are a lot of people who want to influence how the conversation turns out. Now, prepare yourself for a big jump without apparent segue. I have one huge problem with the section of our text book on “exhaling” – especially because your replies (which I have only been able to scan through very quickly at this point) reinforce my concern: the material is presented as if there is only one way to “do emotion.” The “way” is actually a very specific cultural form, it is a limited model of a particular socio-economic class, which has historically been composed of a tightly-bound identity group. The material is seductive, I think, because most of us in this course either “come from” social structures that encourage this approach to emotion, or have been exposed to it as a reference point or ideal. In other words, the editor of our textbook has selected readings by authors who share a common perspective on emotion and communication. In my view, the consequence is to ill-prepare you to deal with difference.
I hope John’s book is a corrective. I am not sure if he will agree or disagree if I offer the opinion that he “does emotion” differently than the model championed in our textbook. I am interested to know (and this is your actual assignment, full details in the UMass Course Pages) how John’s different experiences with interpersonal communication give you an alternative perspective on
a) the role of emotion in communication (especially the part that Stewart describes with the metaphor of exhaling) and
b) how you might recognize if your teammates (in the upcoming group project) are ‘doing emotion’ differently than you, and ‘next’ accordingly.
Thank you, by the way, for being such engaged learners. Teaching is a pleasure to me because I continue my own growth and development: I am learning with you. I am grateful for your diligence because your efforts enable mine.
Now, please read Audience: to imagine or ignore, and return here to contribute to this on-going conversation.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 12:18 am
In the book: look me in the eye: my life with Asperger’s by John Robison, The author describes his life living with Aspergers syndrome. However although he had a few social problems, what seemed to stick out was the fact that he had poor interpersonal communications skills. Skills like nexting, inhaling, and exhaling. For example in the book John describes his time in nursery school with a girl named Chuckle. Specifically his interactions with her, whenever he tried to get her to like him he would resort to unconventional conversation and interaction, such petting and misconceptions of how to play with a truck. Now a regular person when meeting for the first time will never go an pet a person let alone with a stick, they would strike up a conversation by “inhaling” and “exhaling” via the use of good interpersonal communication. Not being able to have interpersonal communication skills let alone execute them properly can cause some emotional problems. For example Robison describes in his book that whenever he tried to execute an interaction or conversation he generally received a negative response. This would sometimes anger him and motivate him to try harder, hence creating a greater rift between himself and the person with whom he his having the conversation with. So it is a possibility that Robison’s misinterpretation of the conversation is due to poor “inhaling” skills, and thus producing poor “exhaling”. This sort of thing can happen to anybody, if a conversation is not going the way you want and is producing negative results you may also get emotional because your message is not geeting through.
Now if I was communicating with my teammates is very likely than one of us will get emotional due to poor execution of “inhaling” and “exhaling”, after all we are communicating online, hence creating the possibility for poor “inhaling” and “nexting”. However these problems can easily be rectified if proper communication occurs via the writing of comments, emails, and discussion treads.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 10:06 am
In the audience to imagine or ignore it talks about storming which most likely goes on the most in this class because a lot of our work Is based off each other work. We all at one time and another have had to respond to someone else posting. We are inhaling the others person ideas or thoughts on the particular assignment were and the writer is exhaling the information from which they had inhaled from someone else. I myself have always been very careful about how I responded to someone else posting. I never want to make someone look bad or disprove their notions on the assignment. So as I’m reading their work I’m thinking about what I should I say next.
In the book john he quotes “that speaking whatever first comes to mind can be as problematic as speaking whatever one had already been thinking. Basically john believes there really isn’t any right way to respond to someone’s thoughts our ideas. I totally disagree with that though. Ms. Kent talks about anticipation I believe that’s a great way to prepare yourself to exhale your thoughts. You just don’t want to say the first thing that comes to your mind because you may have not fully got what the other person was talking about. So you should build up thoughts as this person exhales all this information to you so you’ll be better prepared to responded to the person in the correct way.
Ms.kent also talks about how anticipate the worst or anticipate the best she says the way we anticipate is influenced by many things such as mood, energy, investments, personal history, amount of knowledge/experience, and cultural background. I totally agree with that statement because everything we do is influenced by those factors we all have different feelings about things depending on how you were brought up and what you have been exposed to. Some people have been exposed to other things more than the other person so of course they would have more to say about the subject because they are more familiar with the topic. So when you are speaking with someone on a specific topic you have to take all those things into consideration before you judge them on what they are talking about. So we all must continue to improve our interpersonal communications skills by learning from others.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 10:12 am
Saboy82, it is encouraging to read that you believe this to be easy. Perhaps you are one of those with naturally great interpersonal skills. Or perhaps you just have a strongly positive outlook.
You said: “So it is a possibility that Robison’s misinterpretation of the conversation is due to poor “inhaling” skills, and thus producing poor “exhaling”.”
Wheat if that’s not quite right? What if the other person WAS making a mistake, and I started off on the wrong foot by pointing it out?
As children, we may believe there are “right” and “wrong” ways to play with trucks. But grownups, with presumably greater knowledge, tend to accept most any truck play as OK.
I don’t fully accept that, myself. I still think there are right and wrong ways, but we’ll leave that for the moment . . .
Let’s move to adulthood, and let that scene play out between two adults. And instead of playing with a truck, Chuckie is ignorantly pouring antifreeze into the oil filler hole in her car’s engine.
So now, with greater age and the slightest of changes to the scenarion . . . what happens?
You see, maybe my inhaling is just fine. I just lacked the instinctive sense of how the other person would respond to the news that they were doing something wrong.
And maybe they would get all mad and pissy, being shown that THEY were ruining their car. It’s not a matter of opinion, it’s a fact. Indeed, this often happens in adult life. People become angry at YOU because you made them see how THEY are screwing things up for themselves and maybe others. And they don’t like that hard reality.
And as you make these scenarios more and more complicated it becomes harder and harder to know what’s right, and to get a good outcome.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 10:19 am
Beaver32, you say: “Basically john believes there really isn’t any right way to respond to someone’s thoughts our ideas.”
Indeed, there ARE right and wrong ways. I must be feeling pugnacious this morning, but I hope you won’t be too offended because basically I mean well and it’s all in good humor.
I don’t believe there’s “no right way.” Rather, I believe there is often no way to deliver a truthful response without eliciting an undesirable reaction.
That is rather a different situation.
You can prepare all you want, but nothing will change the fact that you will always encounter people with whom you have fundamental disagreements, and in some cases you will be right, in other cases you will be wrong, but in many more cases the absolute truth is just unknowable, and you must accept that your relative truths are different.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 10:53 am
I am laughing with delight! John – you are wonderful.
The class read a short article on “Fierce Conversations” by Susan Scott. Here’s a quote from a (paid) reviewer, summarizing one of her key points:
“The notion that our lives succeed or fail one conversation at a time is at once common-sensical and revolutionary.”
So, here we are – a guest has entered our conversation . . . OR, is it that we have entered HIS conversation?! Perhaps none of us own it, maybe it belongs to all of us – simultaneously, merely be virtue of the fact of our participation in it.
“Live” interpersonal communication is always this way: the script is open. What are the possibilities for what we can make of it? Where do we want this amazing opportunity to take us?
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 11:12 am
I find that John’s style of emotional communication is something that we actually take for granted. For someone like John who was never corrected or taught the general style of conversation that people are supposed to follow, having a conversation is a lot more of a challenge. Most people take for granted that conversation can be very smooth and easy and we don’t actually have to have a goal in mind. However, for someone like John, who luckily is very driven, he has to work harder at keeping a conversation going and have a main goal in mind. I feel like if John wasn’t so determined to be a good interpersonal communicator then he wouldn’t be having conversations at all. He recognizes now that when people respond a certain way to one of his comments that he either conversed correctly or incorrectly. The idea of inhaling, the listening intently part isn’t as hard for John as expressing his own emotions in the correct manner.
Stephanie talks about anticipation as an emotion involving pleasure due to the predicted outcome. She speaks about how someone can “smile uncontrollably” while anticipating something they are excited about. I can relate the example of how before big sports events that I have played in before I start to get “butterflies” in my stomach not necessarily out of nervousness but rather out of excitement. I also really enjoyed reading the type of anticipation practiced in medicine and how doctors treat a disease based on anticipation of it getting worse and the symptoms involved.
I think that Stephanie is correct with her conceptualization of anticipating for the worst and anticipating for the best. People who are in a conversation that is already known to be difficult or bad will be become defensive. For example, when I am getting a sit down from my parents and know that I am going to be scolded I get defensive and anticipate what they’ll bring up. Anticipating for the best is a more pleasant or jubilant style of conversation. I would say conversations with loved ones or interviews about achievements bring up this style of anticipation.
I think we will be able to recognize if people are doing emotion differently than us by their interpretation of our comments. If I am trying to make a certain point about how I feel about the topic then I will tell if people are understanding what I am saying from their responses. If someone just rewrites my comment in different words then I will recognize that they just simply wanted to put words down with no thought.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 12:16 pm
If we are constantly concerned “very little of how we behave in the world escapes the perception of others (Kent, Continuing to Converse Aug. 2 2008)”, we would all go insane fretting about the ever-present judgment. I think that this would distract us from the most significant part of communication itself, the message and content of what is being expressed. Thinking of what you say and how you act instead of thinking of what you want to say can interfere with the way you communicate and your nexting skills (by focusing less on what the other person is saying) and ironically can decrease the perception others have of you in the end.
On the other hand, pure indifference and complete disregard for public perception could lead to social marginalization and difficulty relating to how others process social queues and understanding future social expectations. John Edgar Robison’s early nonconformity to social queues seem to be literally due to childhood ignorance and inability to follow certain expectations, such as the challenge of looking people in the eye while having a conversation (Robison 3). The road blocks heavily contributed to by Asperger’s are a perfect example of being a social outcast as a direct result of simply conversing counter to exhaling skills that most of us have been taught. This lack of eye contact and “proper expression” in general decreases immediacy, the perceived physical/psychological closeness between people (Richmond and McCroskey 262), because “people who have a positive facial affect and make greater eye contact are perceived as more immediate than people who have negative facial affect and make little eye contact (Richmond and McCroskey 270)”. Perceived. At the same, I do think Robison demonstrates consequentiality in his journey from child to adult because he is able to intellectually analyze the communication in/abilities of his youth to permanently change how he (at least outwardly) interacts with other people to be more “normal” (Robison, Look me in the Eye, 1-288). Elizabeth Kucharczyk’s post on consequentiality for UD 4:3 explains how Robison is able to improve his interpersonal communication skills with each interaction because he uses “elements from that experience in another encounter at a separate time with a different individual” to learn from failures and successes. Essentially, he uses scientific method to get a better understanding of what most of us learned during childhood.
Whether we learn communication from scientific analysis of how others behave, or naturally learn through taught behavior and innate understanding of social cues, I do not think anyone is born with automatic communication skills and ability to “next” conversation or are born knowing socially acceptable methods of “doing emotion”. Have you ever noticed how infants ape adult expressions? If you smile at most babies, they smile back. If your face is blank or if you frown, they may look confused, mimic the behavior, or cry. They are learning to smile when you smile, which leads to “appropriate expression” and understanding of when to smile in later social interactions. Learning. Not an innate ability. I agree with Richmond and McCroskey that immediacy is a continuum (265), but see it as an individual strength or weakness. I think that some people are better at science and math, but may have weaker English and social science abilities. Other people are really good at creative art, while others think more structurally and linearly. I feel I’m somewhere in the middle, suspended between hard and social sciences, creative and linear thinking, balanced but lacking real strength in any particular area. I was a TA for a gen ed science class because the PhD professors needed a “translator” to connect with the undergrads. I love Robison’s response to Saboy82: “Maybe my inhaling is just fine. I just lacked the instinctive sense of how the other person would respond to the news that they were doing something wrong (Robison 8-2-2008)”. Robison is beyond brilliant when it comes to electronics and patterns, just as the Ph.D.’s are leaders in their field. They just need “translators” as they too have lost the ability to instinctively respond to undergraduate students and correct what the students have done wrong, because the examples and “correct” information is lost in their different levels of understanding.
It is impossible for me to recognize if my teammates are “doing emotion” differently than me without first analyzing and recognizing how I “do emotion” and communicate. While blogging, using chat programs such as AIM, and even while text messaging, I almost always use full sentences with punctuation and capitalization (unless I am trying to fit everything on one text message). It annoys the hell out of me to see “wat r u up 2?” or “kk ttyl”, and I have friends who use “L-O-L” as a verbal response to something. WTF? I know I am being unreasonable (and am probably overcompensating by being much more articulate on the page than in person), that my grammar and spelling are nothing special (thank you spell check!), and that I am probably unconsciously and unfairly judging others based on their proficiency with l337 and other Internet slang. There is a huge benefit to being able to keep things concise and to the point, while I have the tendency to ramble on and on and on to process and make a point. Novellas are equally obnoxious. I may have more difficulty “nexting” with someone with a concise response, while many people may feel the same about my posts and not bother with reading/responding to me.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 12:48 pm
In general, as Sports08 and others reiterate, I feel that we successfully incorporated suggestions from the various articles on how to communicate effectively with each other in group settings. TheCakeIsALie echoes other responses that s/he is more comfortable at a computer, and that making teams and conversing amongst ourselves seems “easier” because we already know a little bit about each other. I think that this is an interesting point that relates to a difference in virtual versus personal communication (and sharing, and disclosure, etc.) – when you engage in interpersonal communication at an actual physical level (meaning that you can see the other person) you are able to observe for body language, behavior, etc. and get a whole other sense of how the person is responding to what you are saying. (Note: I wrote this comment before reading Steph’s lecture. It’s funny how we seem to ‘next’ right into the next lecture!).
In John’s book, Look Me In The Eye, we are able to see/experience an entirely different perspective on interpersonal communication. John describes his struggle with communicating, or rather, learning how to communicate with others. Those with Asperger’s are noted to have a compromised ability in reading or interpreting non-verbal behaviors. For instance, John mentions repeatedly that he is uncomfortable at making eye contact with others. In a sense, there is a whole other component to communication – that which is very much part of the human experience. Up until this point, we’ve been learning about and discussion concepts in verbal communication. However, there is an entirely additional spectrum – that of non-verbal communication. At first glance, I thought that this type of communication could not be experienced in the ‘virtual’ world – for instance, we are unable to experience or interpret non-verbal communications in our blog community. However, Steph mentions (and it’s touched upon in the readings) that we are constantly watching each other – the non-verbal of this ‘cyber’ communication is how we orient ourselves – it’s in the order in which we post, how we respond to and incorporate other responses, the italicized, bolded, or highlighted words. This ties into ‘inhaling,’ ‘exhaling,’ and interpreting emotional expression. It is this type of non-verbal and ‘emotional’ communication that will be expressed in the small group conversations.
In reading the comments on Steph’s lecture thus far, it is interesting to note the emotionality behind some of the comments. For instance, John Robinson places emphasis on certain words through capitalization. As the reader, I am able to get a sense of the stress or emphasis placed on the word or the point that John is trying to make.
Additionally (and this is taking a step back to look at the larger picture), we are most certainly utilizing Gottman’s applications of “Putting Feelings Into Words” – literally. Just in the last comment, jimigarcia27 used ‘butterflies,’ ‘nervousness,’ and ‘excitement.’ Even phrases (as Steph uses) like “laughing with delight” carry an emotional power to them that is able to be communicated even in this virtual world. John, as a new guest and contributor to our conversation, do you find that there are differences in the way you perceive this written dialogue (both verbal and non-verbal components) and actual in-person interactions?
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 12:49 pm
I really enjoyed what John Elder Robison wrote in his chapter “Empathy.” He has a really good point when he describes the difference between actually caring, and pretending to care about something. When a terrible tragedy happens somewhere in the world, we are brought up to express emotion. We are expected to express feelings of shock and horror, and maybe even shed a few tears. However, not many people actually care, and they fall back into their daily lives very quickly. I think it is normal not to care very much about things that don’t directly affect us, and it is odd that we are expected to feign such deep emotion. I think the passage he wrote about the death of Eleanor’s son was very endearing. His mother and her friend think he is a maniac when he smiles at the news. However, his thought process makes a lot of sense. He realizes that he and his loved ones are all safe, and the emotion he actually expresses is relief. His mother and her friend probably also feel relieved, but they feel it is more socially acceptable to dwell on the tragic aspect. They are probably not very upset, and the news may actually bring a little bit of excitement and entertainment into their lives. In some ways, they may enjoy the tragedy.
I also think the chapter in which John kills the snake is very interesting, and a good example of how he communicates differently than others. There is a poisonous snake right outside of his hotel room, and he shoots it. Then he realizes he was “standing outside, next to a pool full of kids and sunbathing parents, in my underwear, waving a smoking revolver.” This is the image other people see, and they make their own assumptions. Most of the assumptions are probably bad. It is funny when you realize how drastically differently your actions are being perceived by other people. He goes back into his room, calls the manager, and says, “There was a water moccasin just outside my door but it’s okay because I shot it. Can you send housekeeping to clean up the patio?” This is a good example of the disparity between his social reality, and the social reality of others. There was a problem, and he found a solution. However he must have been bewildered by the reaction of the manager, which was to angrily call the police. What he did wasn’t wrong, and he wasn’t trying to hurt anyone, but it was outside the realm of socially acceptable behavior. I think John’s way of seeing things (although it often gets him into trouble) can be a gift because he is not constantly peering through the stifling veil of societal rules. His first instinct is to make the decision that makes the most sense to him, instead of selecting the option that makes the most sense to his audience.
I found some interesting views on the role of emotion in communication in the comments on “nexting.” Gym 411 mentioned that he gets frustrated and often “shuts down” when his group is not as helpful as it should be. He ends up doing all of the work, though he admits that this problem may be solved if he expressed his feelings on the matter. Like him, I would be more likely to do the extra work and say nothing, rather than confront my group members. JimiGarcia27 mentioned that we probably won’t be expressing much emotion during our group work, which is a good point. I don’t think I have ever really opened up about myself in random group projects, and I don’t think it has affected me all that much. (Except maybe for the distribution of group work!) SpicyNoodleSoup says that it is necessary for us to communicate the entire message we are trying to express in order to avoid confusion. We need to recognize that although we understand our own messages, there may be clues missing that would help relay our whole message to our interlocutors.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Reading a book of a person who had trouble with having communication with the others had lead me to give second thought about the assignments that I had done in previous unit. When I was doing the previous assignment on exhaling, I have admitted that my view on exhaling was only targeting the people who know how to have conversations. I really did not consider much about people who might not good at having any conversations. Stewart had presented several ways to enhance exhaling, but they only work for people who are comfortable with having conversation. I do not think anyone, who is having hard time with presenting their ideas to the others, would follow any of the exhaling methods presented by Stewart. Some of the exhaling methods even seemed challenge for a person who is familiar with having conversation like express your feeling immediately or directly. I think the discomfort with having conversation is caused by inexperienced practice in inhaling and in exhaling, or not trust or care about your listeners. The discomfort can caused by the realization of being different from the others, and it eventually impedes a person to expressing himself to the others.
I liked how Ms. Kent has defined anticipation into two different ways: positive, and negative. To me, anticipating the bad is happening when I know something bad will happen to me and I tried to reduce the sadness by protecting myself. Anticipating the best happens when I know something good will happen to me, and try to make the happiness bigger by sharing with the others. I think the people who have difficulties in having conversation tends to anticipate the worst whenever they have conversation, because they are afraid of hearing the comments from others or realizing the differences. People tend to protect themselves in case of danger which might offend the others in a conversation. When people trust the others, they can anticipate the best.
Realizing the difference is a good method to learn about the others. Therefore, people should not be afraid of finding their differences, and learn the others from those differences. In order to accept those differences, we always need to be open minded about everything.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 1:14 pm
JimiGarcia and Jaggerbunny have both written some fantastic ‘assignments’ – although I’m not sure they noticed John is actually contributing to this – THIS! – conversation among us?
A couple of quick responses:
1) This notion of being “correct” in a conversation is at the core of many miscommunications. While it seems to me that JimiGarcia has overinterpreted John’s statement about not being corrected, what I am most interested by is the assumption that John was “incorrect”. The exchange between John and Saboy82 is all about the way “being right” looks from one “side” of the conversation and how it looks from the “other side” of a conversation. When the rightness/wrongness depends on the point-of-view, I think it is dicey territory to assume either interlocutor’s vantage point. This is where the skill of “nexting” becomes absolutely vital.
2) I am tickled that Jaggerbunny has included the anecdote of John with a smoking gun – I mean, come on! The synchronicity is too sweet! He has just burst onto the scene of our classroom (yes?) and fired his revolver with pinpoint precision.
!
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Having an autistic sister has made me experience some of these communication challenges that John wrote about in Look me in the Eye. Avoiding eye contact, having random responses, and having unique ways of playing with her toys are all common with my sister. But since she is part of my life, I don’t see her actions as being “wrong” but just different. John’s communication barriers seem to have been created by the ignorance or the lack of understanding that others around him had of him and his condition with Asperger’s. In general, people tend to tie themselves up with what’s “common” in society and what’s the “right” way to do things and feel confused with anything that might be different or challenge their point of view. From my experience I’ve noticed how it is easier for people to point fingers at others and judge how “wrong” others are, instead of viewing the “difference” as a learning experience and how we are all different in this world (which makes it an interesting place to live in!).
With my sister, her autistic classmates, and in Johns chaise , I do not see any “inhaling” communication problems. Their ability to concentrate on a task and learn is actually impressive. For example, my sister can meet and learn someone’s name today, and not see the person for 4 months. But the next time she sees him/her she will remember the person’s name without any difficulty. I can’t remember my professor’s names from last semester! I think the role of emotion and “exhaling” were the reasons that created a difficulty in communication John early life (and my sister currently) because they do not see the importance of “fitting” in (their responses) with society. Caring about how other people will “feel” is secondary. The first thing is to get their message across. For example, In Johns case he wanted to show Chuckle, in his view, the proper way to play with a truck without caring if she wanted to know this. In a communication situation, John was able to respond, but not in a way that he could anticipate what to do in order to get the outcome he wanted. It seemed like most of the time he went with his “gut” instinct and answered to what he believed was the right thing to say, without thinking what the person wanted to hear. The role of emotion in a communication was not there. “Exhaling” with the intentions to satisfy the other persons expectations in order to receive the wanted response in return was not an easy thing to recognize. It’s not easy for anyone to figure this out; it’s that much harder with people that have learning disabilities or communication problems.
As of working in teams, one way that I can recognize if my teammates are “doing emotions”, and “nexting” accordingly is if they ask questions about each other’s work. Asking with the intention to understand, instead of asking with the intention to challenge an opinion can create different atmospheres. The intention to understand can create an open atmosphere with people caring about the “emotion” that each writer intends to communicate. The more we ask and intend to understand and learn from each other, without “holding back” on our opinions and what we really think, the easier the communication can be. Other classmates agree with this also, for example Saboy82 mentioned that “…in order to receive fruitful input from all team members it is vital that all ideas and comments are expressed, this will enhance the team productivity and way of thinking.” Having an atmosphere “wherein we feel safe, listened to, and respected.”(Grant2u) is what I gathered that most of us would like to see in our group projects.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 1:32 pm
When I was reading all of the comments, one stood out for me above all of the others. Johnniedrama proposes a conspiracy theory (I love those!) about being misled. It struck me as interesting because if Steph had intentionally done all of this, it displays an earlier concept we looked at: stereotyping. She is stereotyped as the professor, leading the class in discussion and is generally taken to be a beacon of truth. We can and should take her words as accurate, at least as far as she knows (which is farther than I know). If she knowingly did this we would have been blindly following her words and done as she had said and not realized that the other articles were the other parts to the overall idea. If some random person came in and threw you three articles and said “read only one and write stuff about it” and walked away, you’d either brush the stranger off or read all three because you had nothing better to do and crazy people are always fun (or it wasn’t football season and there’s nothing worth watching on TV). But because Steph controls our grades and she knows what she’s doing, we did as she told us. I got a little carried away, but Johnniedrama’s comment sent off a very large and very fast train of thought.
In John’s book, he describes an early interaction in life which he somewhat revisits throughout, if only by slight reference. He tries to play with a little girl and show her the “correct” way to play with a truck. He completely foregoes her emotions and is just worried that she plays with the truck in the “correct” manner. He couldn’t detect her emotions and the interaction ended with him being scolded by the teacher. Another example is a little funnier, but the snake at the Florida hotel. There’s a paragraph where John realizes the scene he’s in (quite a feat for him I would think, he said he had trouble seeing things from other people’s perspective): standing in his underwear holding a gun… next to a pool full of kids and parents. He was so focused on the snake and didn’t realize that shooting off a gun would scare the hell out of others.
The interesting thing about an online format: the impersonality of it all. It is so hard to read text. Reading is easy but to determine the “voice” it’s written in is so damn hard. A lot of people in my generation have had that experience where you text or “AIM” a sentence with very good intentions, or in jest, and you piss someone off. Letters carry no inflection, no tone, no emphasis, therefore the hidden meaning behind words is often lost. When talking with our groups, we’re going to have to realize that when we say something, that’s the only meaning that someone’s going to get. There’s no hints allowed. Saying “yeah I had a nice day” can mean so many things depending on how it’s said, we’re just going to have to remember that when we’re grouped up.
And John, I wish I had your technical expertise! I’ve been building computers (not from scratch) since I was 12, and I was the same way when I was little, taking everything apart, except sometimes I didn’t get everything back together.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I really enjoyed this reading, along with “Look Me In The Eyes.” Through out all of the difficulties that John has experienced in his life. I realize how much I actually take for granted. Normally this would upset me, and I would get down on myself for being a “bad person.” But actually I have received a significant amount of motivation after reading John’s story. Simply because of how determined John was to become a positive interpersonal communicator, with the challenges he faced. I have certainly had challenges in my life with communicating, as I was in fifth grade and was diagnosed with a language processing learning disability. Although this does not come close to the difficulties John has experienced. I felt as though I was less of a person and that I was noticeably different from my interlocutors, as a young child- which made me feel inferior; causing a loss of confidence. John describes that when someone replies to his comments that he expects to be conversed either correctly or incorrectly. I have never thought of it this way, actually I agree that this is the case nearly all of the time. Especially with certain people… John has a difficult time with inhaling from other peoples conversations. This is something that he was able to overcome, through out all the obstacles that are in his way. Active listening did not come easy for John either. This is very interesting especially when considering our own ways of practicing active listening, and sometimes I take for granted my ability. Many times I find myself simply choosing not to listen to what someone is telling me, for a lack of interest or because I am not happily anticipating the conversation ahead. John did not have the ability to listen actively as easily as many of us do, and he certainly had the drive and will power to try his best, therefore when I think back and consider the times where I chose not to listen when I am being spoken to I will always remember John’s example and influence I received from reading his book. I enjoy how Stephanie discusses the action of smiling uncontrollably in certain situations. For instance I often find myself smiling uncontrollably when I am being complimented for a challenge that I have overcome. An example of this can be when someone asks me to do them a favor that I feel I am unqualified to preform well, and subsequently I do indeed actually do a good job, I am complimented- many times it is hard to stop smiling. Also anticipating the worst is something I used to be very good at, as I was sometimes pessimistic. For instance I would anticipate getting yelled at in high school when I got home way too late. Walking into my house I would simply expect to get yelled at, therefore I would anticipate the worst. Although I really enjoy this idea of anticipation I would like to share an exception to it. So when I walked into my house hours past the time I said I’d be home, I was asked “Where have you been, you’re late?!” Luckily, I was only late because I was driving friends home who were incapable of driving themselves home that night. Instead of being out and partying like many of my friends I was driving them home. So when I walked into my house, no doubt I certainly anticipated the worst, but I knew in the back of my head I had a little light of hope, since I felt I had done the right thing. Sure enough after explaining myself the conversation ended up with my dad shaking my hand and telling me I did the right thing, just call next time!. I feel this is important especially in my case, as I have mentioned I used to be rather pessimistic, therefore I would often anticipate the worst in circumstances that I should not have. I have since tried to always anticipate the best, even in a negative situation I try to find some positive that can come from it. It is so much easier this way, than always anticipating the worst..!
In our group work it will be rather easy to decipher whether people are showing much emotion than we are. A possible way to decipher this will be through the sarcasm, and other ways that people respond to us. Although there has not been any sarcasm thus far in class, and I highly doubt there will be through people’s responses to one-another, I feel like it is certainly a way of telling emotion through a discussion online. I think everyone is very polite and conscientious when replying to class mates. The reason being that no one wants to make someone else look bad, everyone has enough respect for one another in class to not do this. But also I feel that there is an understanding that if one replies to a class mate in a negative or rude manner, they understand that this may happen to them in the future. Therefore we will be able to decipher emotion from our class mates responses through being able to understand from their responses how thoroughly they understood the discussion post that they are responding to. If they really do not touch upon the important parts of the discussion and simply make small statements, one might assume that they disagree, or that they did not find the post very interesting, or even so they did not understand it. People have their own ways of interpreting emotion from online discussions, some people may have past experiences with this, others may just use the skills that they have learned through out this class. I feel that these are certain ways that I know I will use to try and find emotion shown through my class mates responses, but I am positive that there are other ways as well.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 6:50 pm
The first few chapters of John’s book “Look Me in the Eye” were not only very interesting but also extremely thought provoking and insightful. I really enjoyed peering through the eyes of someone whose interpersonal communication skills differ from those we find to be “socially acceptable.” However, as Jaggerbunny explained – just because they are “different” does not mean they are wrong. In the snake shooting incident, the logic of how to handle the situation was not the lacking element – instead it was evaluating the outcome of what others may think. In a way, John has it easier than those who are socially trained into acting and communicating “properly.” John does know what is right and wrong – he knows he wants to make friends with a girl and he knows the right way to play with a truck. What he does not know is how to communicate it. Instead of ruminating of the possible socially acceptable ways to go about handling a situation, he comes up with his best possible solution and continues on to carry it out.
In Robinson’s chapter on empathy he describes how we are taught to experience empathy – a key part of interpersonal communcation, with others. When a natural disaster occurs across the globe and lives are lost we are expected to express sadness, when someone we know gets married we are suppose to express happiness. However, how much of these emotions are REAL? I personally am very empathetic but I am always extremely bothered when others pretend to exude emotions they do not feel. I think one of John’s most admirable qualities is his ability to be himself and be real. Although this could produce both positive and negative outcomes in communication – he doesn’t care what others think. However, when ShinyGinger quoted Elizabeth’s post of UD 4.3 she explained that although Robinson’s action as a child were labeled as wrong and seen as disparate from those of other children, causing him to be ostracized, he took each interaction as a learning experience.
Another element that delivermesummer touches upon, is that over interpersonal communication. Although John’s interpretation skills were compromised he was also uncomfortable in the non-verbal realm. As communication “scholars,” it is clear just how important the ability to communicate non-verbally is, without the ability to look someone in the eye or know the acceptable way to approach a potential friend, John was seen as even more “different.”
In Steph’s post Audience: To Imagine or Ignore. She addresses just these issues. Should we acknowledge the presense of an audience or act as ourselves? As John mentioned in a few posts above – there is a right and wrong way to communicate and based on his experiences the correct way is NOT to ignore. After reading the chapter, lectures, and postings, my own interpretation is that as communicators we are responsible for listening (actively, aka not just hearing), absorbing or “inhaling” the information, anticipating what sort of route we should take in our response and simultaneously judging the situation (comfort level, situation, cultural norms, etc), nexting to find out more, and finally exhaling our own opinions, thoughts, feelings, etc. What IS the right way to do all of this though? I know John said there is a right way, but what determines this?
I studied cross-cultural communications last year and studiers of this area of communications would avidly argue that there is NO right way. For instance, she explained as a case study she observed an American businessman attempting to make a deal with an Asian businessman, neither one was briefed on cultural variants prior to their engagement. To make a long story short, the Asian businessman felt extremely uncomfortable because the American businessman was suffocating him (in terms of space), and thus left feeling awkward and chose against doing a deal with him. Little did the American businessman know, in Asian culture – space (proximity to the other person) is valued and coming too close exhibits uncalled for aggressiveness. However, in our culture we would view that as cold. So, which is right, which is wrong?
As far as our group projects – I am sure Steph chose members that are all different to see how we would interact with one another (sort of like a Real-World experiment? ☺). After reading John’s experiences and of course using what we have learned thus far, I will probably be less likely to jump to conclusions on how someone is or is not “something” (if that makes sense). Basically, I understand there are different ways of communicating and “doing emotion” and thus if I personally misunderstand I will “next” in order to fully understand and grasp what the other person is communicating. After all, in my opinion – there is no right and wrong way to communicate, even for people that come from the same household, let alone the same culture, ethnicity, religion, so on and so forth.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 8:56 pm
In John Robison’s book “look me in the eye” I see his way of communicating from a different angle. I try to find ways in which there are similarities to compare and John’s methods of communication to the interpersonal skills we are learning about in our text. John had some serious barriers to get through and I am not in any way trying to minimize that. Making conversations and friends didn’t happen naturally, it took work, a lot of work. It was much harder for him to take a “breath”, through our terms of “inhaling” and “exhaling”.
John mentions that at age nine “I had a life-changing revelation….I didn’t try to pet kids anymore, or to poke them with sticks…I figured out how to talk to other children”. “I suddenly realized that when a kid said,‘Look at my Tonka truck,’ he expected and answer that made sense in the context of what he had said.” I think that is what a big part of communication is “knowing the answers that people expect”. I think that is in effect part of what we do here when we are “nexting” in this class but also face to face in other relationships, depending on what the setting. Sometimes it’s natural but sometimes it’s learned. As we respond to each other in class by means of “nexting” we want to get it right.
John writes a chapter about “empathy” and some struggles with people not understanding his responses to certain situations. He mentions the fact that “people have an inbred tendency to care about and protect themselves and their immediate family”. John goes on to explain from a logical point how he is not concerned with people he doesn’t know and their tragedies. That is totally logical to me and I understand his viewpoint, I think that everyone needs to be sensitive to who is “listening” and that if we know someone is upset we are then “expected” to perform a certain way. This again is almost an issue of social conformity to me, wherein one person says “that’s terrible” and just assumes that everyone has the same feelings. I think that John doesn’t stand alone in his thinking or emotions here but the difference is that he had to make a conscious effort to control his facial expressions and words in these instances. John said “the only real difference is that I have learned what people expect in common social situations. So I can act more normal and there’s less chance I’ll offend anyone”.
As I once again read the responses to “nexting” and being nexted: what we exhale becomes us. A few things stood out to me about what I thought I’d try to keep in mind while working in team. In my opinion, some self disclosure will be an important aspect of the teams’ communication to work effectively. I agree with sayboy82 who says, “In order to receive fruitful input from all team member it is vital that all ideas and comments are expressed, this will enhance the team productivity and way of thinking”. So I think that I will try to look for cues to what someone is disclosing or not telling when they come up to the plate and try to find a way to encourage positive feedback in a non-judgmental manner. If I find that my team mate isn’t “nexting” I will try to find different ways to “next” them to evoke a response.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Emotion is maybe the most key component of communication, bar none. It is the essence to everything that is done throughout the communication process. It can affect every step, and thus can cause a derailing of a “normal” communication. If you go to and talk to your best friend, and expect to talk about what you did this weekend, but your friend derails your proposed conversation by saying that her mother just died, then emotion is going to shape the way that conversation continues (please excuse the morbidity of that topic, but I need an extreme to articulate the possible effects).
Beaver32 says that s/he “never wants to make someone look bad or disprove their notions on the assignment,” but then what is the point of being in a discussion. If you are going to be talking about something, then you can not have any restrictions. It’s not like you can ask someone to review your piece of work, but then tell them “but don’t tell me anything bad about it.” Better yet, find something that you CAN smash them on, and send them reeling and put them on their back foot, so that way they can come back and defend the stance that they just wrote about, or they can next you and interpolate what you are saying and perhaps make their ideas change to better suit a different perspective.
Furthermore, jimigarcia27 brings up a good point when s/he says “the listening intently part isn’t as hard for John as expressing his own emotions in the correct manner.” The basic fact of the matter is that anyone can “inhale,” but what matter is how emotion and cognition tinker with that inhalation. If John saw Chuckie playing with that toy truck the same way that he played with it, there wouldn’t have been an issue, however, because John saw Chuckie “improperly using” the truck, the following consequences occurred.
Jimigarcia27 brings up another situation regarding Steph’s take on anticipation in a conversation. Jimigarcia27 says “when I am getting a sit down from my parents and know that I am going to be scolded I get defensive and anticipate what they’ll bring up.” John Robison didn’t have this type of anticipation when he was younger and entering into new conversations. Example being when he tried to play cowboys and Indians – he just jumped right in. He (I’m assuming here) knew that other kids usually didn’t like him, yet he did not anticipate this and just decided to enter into THEIR fun. By melding anticipation with emotion, certain consequences can be seen if their normal course of action is being taken. If that cowboys and Indians situation was previously assessed using anticipation/emotion, John would have known that they boys, including Ronnie Rosnon, wouldn’t like that.
Lastly, commsyr09 talks about empathy and how he is “extremely bothered when others pretend to exude emotions they do not feel.” Well, to be honest, I find it very hard to be artificially empathetic. I really only express TRUE emotions. The hardest time that I have is when someone that I barely know tells me something that I should be empathetic about (marriage, death, disease etc). Up until now, I just thought I was selfish, because I couldn’t express emotion in empathetical situations (whether real or fake), but now I see that there is a battle in my head between the “right thing to do” vs “what I want to do.”
Now, in terms of deciphering the nature of a group-mate’s emotion and nexting that emotion, I do have a bit of a concern. Using this online format, it makes our listening and nexting skills infinitely more important due to the possible miscommunications that might occur. A lot of times, especially at a large university like UMass, people of several different backgrounds are attracted to the diversity that is offered, and this will create diversity in classes. Usually, in a “normal” class, diversity can be seen (via people’s appearances), sometimes even heard (through people’s voices/accents), but not here. When reading a comment or a weblog or a discussion post, the way it is written is now more important than ever. The slightest type-o or grammatical error can throw off the reader, and make the reader think that the writer is of a different background than the reader – whether culturally, religiously, socioeconomically, or mentally. Knowing this, if I feel that I person expresses themselves or “appears” different from a group, I know that I can hide behind the mask of a computer screen name and have them work out their issues with the group. In a face-to-face format, the discomfort might be more prevalent, but with the students having the ability to say what they want, and then not having to (literally) face their colleagues the next day makes the discretion a lot more lenient in the sender’s mind.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 9:21 pm
This whole thing is interesting to me to observe. I have never before seen a class where people study (as a group) how to communicate.
I always knew they taught “communication” in college, but frankly, I always figured “communication” was another word for “spin” or whatever it is that politicians, advertisers, and professional tricksters do. I didn’t think it was a serious, well intentioned one on one or small group thing.
It’s worth considering whether a person like me – with communication challenges that result from some kind of neurological difference – would have benefited from a class like this, long ago.
I really don’t know. Would I have been able to take this all in a age 20 or 24? I doubt it.
But the idea that other people are actually studying how to communicate is encouraging. It bodes well for our society.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Many of the readings thus far emphasize that emotion plays an integral role in the communication process. What emotions we experience have consequentiality on the outcome of our interpersonal communications. Stephanie Kent says “Very little of how we behave in the world escapes the perception of others, how we are is observed.” This particular attention we pay to each other also seems to have an effect on the course of the conversation, as the participants’ emotions vary. For example Thecakeisalie explains that “when you’re nervous, your thoughts become jumbled and aren’t as concise as they should or would be.” This shows how nervousness can have a definite negative impact on our ability to communicate effectively. I think we must all experience the feeling of nervous anticipation sometimes, and understand this sentiment that the ability to effectively “inhale” and “exhale” in conversation in lessened when we feel anxious and nervous, or uncomfortable.
Conversely Jimigarcia27 commented that “Stephanie talks about anticipation as an emotion involving pleasure due to the predicted outcome. She speaks about how someone can “smile uncontrollably” while anticipating something they are excited about.” Perhaps this shows that anticipation can have a positive effect on our general enthusiasm for communication and focus our ability to actively listen and “exhale.” I also feel like having learned and practiced somewhat my listening and nexting skills in general conversation outside of class has made me more motivated to communicate effectively and my enthusiasm produces more engaged and thoughtful “exhalations.” Jimigarcia27 provides another interesting perspective on emotional influences: “I think as far as dealing with personal issues, putting emotions into words is important but as far as interacting with strangers there isn’t a need to be expressing that much emotion. I think its important to share personal experiences to express what you’ve been through but I don’t think it is necessary to share the most personal of emotions.” Our comfort level with whom we are communicating effects the level of self-disclosure we are comfortable with.
John Robinson’s account of the emotional roadblock of looking people in the eye in conversation, and the negative effects on his interactions in general shows another interesting example of how our emotions and comfort level effect the perceptions that other have of us. I have many times felt uncomfortable in conversations because I am not comfortable reciprocating someone’s eye contact. I think that these emotions arise primarily when I am confronted by someone who has a very different communication style from myself, and seems to me like they are bent on keeping eye contact, making me feel uncomfortable to look away. This emotional state makes me less effective at communicating what I want (I see in retrospect) and makes me stumble on my words, conversing distractedly because of my preoccupation.
Differences in our individual emotional states change the course of our communications as we are confronted by each other in different ways. Different “styles” of communication or the level of comfort always has some effect on our perceptions and choices when conversing with each other. This ties in with Stephanie Kent’s idea that “If our perceptions and attributions of meaning differ from each other’s, then we are confronted with making choices about whether or not to invest in building something common or letting the differences determine the parameters of relationship.” I think the idea is that we as individuals perceive our interactions with each other in such a unique way that our emotional differences “confront” us to consciously mold our “exhalations” accordingly. At least, if we don’t want the emotional differences between us to constrain what could be.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 9:37 pm
In an eariler post, commsyr09 said, I know John said there is a right way, but what determines this?
My answer: Logic and reason determine it, much of the time.
Let’s consider her example of the Asian and the American business people. Let’s assume that both parties believe the continued existance and prosperity of the other is to their mutual benefit. And let’s assume each wants something the other has.
In that situation, there is going to be (one or more) business combinations that give maximum benefit and minimal downside to both parties. That should be intuitively obvious – the idea that a maximally fair and mutually beneficial deal exists.
But can either party discover it? And if one discovers it, can he convey it to the other such that they both agree?
That is the challenge.
One can apply logic to many things in life where both sides come out ahead. One can also apply logic when total victory is desired (i.e. in warfare) I’d venture to say a grasp of logic will take you farther than most anything else, except great interpersonal communication skills.
And the one place logic often fails is indeed this interpersonal communication, especially when it’s romantic. It’s very hard to use logic to choose a mate, even more so when you recognize that a potential mate must choose you back.
I touch upon this in Look Me in the Eye. I actually plan to write more on Mate Acquisition and Retention in my next book.
Saturday August 2, 2008 at 10:43 pm
All of the reading we have done for this part of class has made me feel different emotions about feeling emotions in general. I believe this is happening due to the portion of John Robison’s book I read because it made me think differently about expressing emotion. Before reading the book I had never heard of Asperger’s and I did not know much about the effects of autism which made what I read (the first third of the book) a learning experience for me that was outside the realm of our interpersonal communication class. To me, one glaring facet of John’s experiences that I read was that how John interpreted each interaction he had was completely opposing everything we have read so far in Stewart’s book as well as what I thought we were learning in class. Gottman’s concept of naming your feelings in order to express them seemed like such and easy task to me that I thought nothing of it while writing about the previous articles until I read “Look Me in the Eye”. Saboy82 wrote, “He proposes that if you name your feelings your brain will engage in a logical and language process…”. This is what seemed easy to me and apparently it is to Gottman as well. John made me think abstract to my own thought process about how difficult it would be if I myself could not do what I think is simple such as put my feelings into words. His book so far is outstanding I think and I do plan on finishing it to the end even if it is not for class.
Emotion is such a key part of interpersonal communication and comes easy to most people in everyday, face to face conversation. It is the non-verbal aspect of face to face communication that at times gets the point across and often time is the point that is trying to be made. Emotion makes the conversation and without it you can easily send the wrong message as coming off as apathetic or you can make someone angry or sad unintentionally. I share in Cake’s feeling that text messaging and AIM conversations are simply that. They are only text and without the emotion behind it you can “piss someone off”. I will openly say that the best example I have to share comes from when I was in a relationship the past couple years. I felt that whenever a text message simply stating, “I love you” was left without an exclamation point I interpreted it automatically as, “I don’t care that much, but since I have to send it every night here it is, be happy.” John’s book helped me understand the importance of emotion, from the perspective of someone who has Asperger’s and can not identify with emotions easily and must find ways to identify with them.
When thinking about how I am going to identify the emotions that will be expressed by my team members I think that it will be easiest for me if there are explicit details within what they are communicating to me. I communicate my emotion through using explicit details when communicating through text only and until I interact with my team members I feel I will be able to figure out how each of them is expressing their emotion, just saying the best way is with detail for me. Social image should come into play here because the different ways emotion will be displayed by everyone will shape the respective social image of a particular person in our online environment. Grant2u quotes Johnson with a definition of “impression management”, “behaving in different ways to reach the desirable goal of social image.” It is the identification of these different ways that will shape the way that each of us views one another during the team project. In the book, Asperger’s made John seen like a “sociopath” to every psychiatrist he saw up to the point I had gotten to in the book. John was not a sociopath but since his outwardly displayed emotions matched those of a sociopath he was therefore dubbed one. Go teams!
Sunday August 3, 2008 at 6:56 am
We have to use logic in a conversation in order to not sound like we are dumb or insane. In the book “Look me in the Eyes” John Elder says this many times. A great example of this is in Chapter 20 “Logic vs. Small Talk”. One of his friends come up to him and says that one of her friends is having an affair with a guy that rides a motor cycle much like Johns. The problem he finds is that his friends did not ask a question to start the conversation so he does not know if he should respond with an opinion or a statement. He clearly has trouble with interpersonal communication because most people respond without even thinking about it. His normal reaction is to find out more about the situation. He asks who the person is. She does not like this reaction because he does not need to know who the person is. He should have given a statement like “that’s cool is he married?”.
I understand where is coming from but I feel like who it is, is a perfectly normal reaction to the question. He does not really care about this woman and her affair but because he wants to have friends he try to communicate an interest in the conversation. Nexting is an important part of creating a relationship. Asking questions to learn more is not always about actually caring about what the other person is saying a lot of times it has everything to do with creating a relationship and trying to make other people think you’re an interesting person worth talking to and getting to know better.
I feel like this problem can come up very easily in an online class. Even people without communication disorders can run into trouble with responding the wrong way. We can not hear the tone of another person’s voice. Or see facial expressions that help us indicate what patented responses we have for peoples statements. This is something we learn growing up. Responses to questions so we seem like polite people and without this skill I feel like communication could be very difficult much like it is for John Elder.
Sunday August 3, 2008 at 10:32 am
To be completely honest, I had never before this class thought much about the way in which I, or others communicate. I never considered different “skills,” tactics and/ or ways to improve my interpersonal communication, rather, it just was. Communication, to most, seems to come naturally, with little to no effort involved. Whether it is by lack of comprehension, or pure laziness, the “average” person rarely takes the time to plan out their words and/ or how they will best communicate their main goal/ idea. I had never thought to imagine what it would be like to have to prepare and think deeply before even the most “basic” conversation/ interaction. John Robison describes his life living with Asperger’s syndrome and how he had to do exactly that. In the book, it is made clear that he struggled with various things due to the syndrome, however it was his strain with interpersonal communication that appeared to be most disheartening.
Reading John’s words I received a wake up call. At first, I felt ashamed and embarrassed for taking such a wonderful thing as the ability to interact and communicate successfully, for granted. Then, I came to realize that feeling bad will not change John’s past, and it will not create change in the future. Therefore, being more aware of my own and others’ interpersonal communication can better us all. In the book, John describes how looking people in the eye was something almost impossible for him to do. When communicating with others, eye contact expresses respect and genuine interest, so it is a crucial aspect to successful communication. He shares an example of his other specific areas of struggle, through his interaction with a girl from childhood, named Chuckle. He attempted to interact with her and gain her interest, and yet he failed. On one occasion, he had pet her with a stick, and then proceeded to try and teach her the “correct” way to play with a truck. Instead of having a good time interacting and playing with her, the end result was getting scolded by the teacher.
Emotional trauma is no doubt likelihood when one has an inability to interpersonally communicate. For example, throughout Robison’s youth, he generally received a negative response when attempting to interact with those around him, hence escalating his anger. He would then try even harder to get his point across, only making matter worse and creating a damaging experience. With poor “inhaling,” listening actively and intently and “exhaling,” responding and expressing reaction appropriately, skills, it is probable that experiences such as Robison’s would be common. When one cannot get their purpose, goal across it is reasonable that they would become angry, emotional, and frustrated.
I enjoyed reading what Stephanie had written about extreme assumptions, as I had never thought about it before, yet it is so very true. When anticipating something negative, for example a reprimand by a parent, or a fight with a friend, one naturally enters the situation with a negative outlook. We assume that an argument, or some form of unpleasant interaction is approaching, and therefore we put our guards up and tend to get defensive. All of this is happening before we even begin communicating with the other person (people) and it has such a strong impact on the outcome of the interaction. On the converse, when approaching a positive setting, we become excited, and as Stephanie mentions, we can become so happy that we cannot stop smiling. Obviously, I prefer the latter, as it promises for a much more pleasant, successful interpersonal communication.
I believe that in order to communicate “correctly” we must approach interactions with neither a negative or overly positive stance. We must be aware of our own emotions and abilities as well as others’, and handle communication accordingly. When working together in groups we must make sure to consider that not all other classmates are exactly like us, with the same strategies and skills as us. We must both ask, and answer questions respectfully and with an open mind.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 8:01 pm
[...] as talking over other people. As Steph says in her lecture regarding “nexting”, <a href=“http://aplaceinspace.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/continuing-to-converse/”>Steph’s comments.</a>, “The point is that we are always and forever joining [...]
Saturday August 16, 2008 at 10:50 am
[...] an assignment I had apparently not graded. Indeed, upon checking, it seems I neglected to evaluate Johnnie Drama’s post about the role of emotion in IPC. (It seems I started the process, as a few submissions are graded, but I must have gotten [...]
Saturday August 16, 2008 at 5:32 pm
[...] autism, and how he was able to overcome so many obstacles Sports08 writes: “I have certainly had challenges in my life with communicating, as I was in fifth grade and was diagnosed with a language processing [...]