Reading A

Interpersonal communication is a complex process of creating meaning in the context of an interpersonal relationship. To better understand interpersonal communication as a distinct form of communication, it is useful to examine the basic communication process.

Elements of the Communication Process

The most basic components of communication include these elements: source, message, channel, receiver, noise, feedback, and context. Understanding each of these elements can help you analyze your own communication with others as you relate to them in interpersonal situations as well as other communication contexts. Let’s explore these elements in greater detail.

• Source. The source of a message is the originator of the ideas and feelings expressed. The source puts a message into a code, a process called encoding. The opposite of encoding is the process of decoding; this occurs when the receiver interprets the words or nonverbal cues.
• Message. Messages are the written, spoken, and unspoken elements of communication to which people assign meaning. You can send a message intentionally (talking to a professor before class) or unintentionally (falling asleep during class); verbally (“Hi. How are you?”), nonverbally (a smile and a handshake), or in written form (this book).
• Channel. The channel is the means by which the message is expressed to the receiver. If you’re typical, you receive messages through a variety of channels that include mediated channels such as text messaging, e-mail, phone, video conference, Facebook, or Twitter.
• Receiver. The receiver of the message is the person or persons who interpret the message and ultimately determine whether your message was understood and appropriate. As we emphasize in this book, effective communicators are other-oriented; they understand that the listener ultimately makes sense of the message they express.
• Noise. Noise is anything that interferes with the message being interpreted as it was intended. Noise happens. If there were no noise, all of our messages would be interpreted accurately. But noise is always present. It can be literal – such as beeps coming from an iPad or iPhone that signal incoming e-mail – or it can be psychological – such as competing thoughts, worries, and feelings that capture our attention.
• Feedback. Feedback is a response to the message. Think of a Ping-Pong game. Like a Ping-Pong game, messages bounce back and forth. We talk; someone listens and responds; we listen and respond to this response. This perspective can be summarized using a physical principle: For every action, there is a reaction. Without feedback, communication is rarely effective. When your roommate says, “Would you please pick up some milk at the store?”, you may say, “What kind – 1 percent, 2 percent, organic, or chocolate?” Your quest for clarification is feedback. Further feedback may seek additional information, or simply confirm that the message has been interpreted: “Oh, some 1 percent organic milk would be good.” Like other messages, feedback can be intentional (your mother gives you a hug when you announce your engagement) or unintentional (you yawn as you listen to your uncle tell his story about bears again); verbal (“That’s a pepperoni pizza, right?”) or non-verbal (blushing after being asked to dance).
• Context. Context is the physical and psychological environment for communication. All communication takes place in some context. As the cliché goes, “Everyone has to be somewhere.” A conversation on the beach with your good friend would likely differ from a conversation the two of you might have in a funeral home. Context encompasses not only the physical environment but also the people present and their relationships with the communicators, the communication goal, and the culture of which the communicators are a part.

PART II: Interpersonal Communication Principles

Underlying our current understanding of interpersonal communication are five principles: Interpersonal communication connects us to others, is irreversible, is complicated, is governed by rules, and involves both content and relationship dimensions. Without a clear understanding of inter-personal communication principles, people may rely on untrue characterizations of communication, which can increase communication problems. So in addition to presenting interpersonal communication principles, we also correct some of the misunderstandings people have about interpersonal communication and suggest why these myths persist.

Interpersonal Communication Connects Us to Others

Unless you are living in a cave or have become a cloistered monk, you interact with others every day. We agree with author H. D. Duncan, who said, “We do not relate and then talk, but relate in talk”. Fundamental to an understanding of interpersonal communication is the assumption that the quality of interpersonal relationships stems from the quality of communication with others. As we noted earlier, people can’t not communicate. Because people often don’t intend to express ideas or feelings, this perspective is debated among communication scholars. However, there is no question that interpersonal communication is inescapable and that communication connects us to others.

As important as communication is in connecting us to others, it’s a myth that all interpersonal relationship problems are communication problems. Although communication makes inter-personal relationships possible, sometimes the problem is not that there is a communication problem, but that people simply disagree. “You don’t understand me!” shouts Paul to his exasperated partner, Chris. “We just can’t communicate anymore!” Paul seems to think that the problem he and Chris are having is a communication problem. But Paul and Chris may understand each other perfectly; they may be self-centered or grumpy, or they may just disagree. The problem in the relationship may not be communication, but a non-other-oriented, self-absorbed communicator.

The ever-present nature of interpersonal communication doesn’t mean others will always accurately decode your messages; it does mean that others will draw inferences about you and your behavior – conclusions based on available information, which may be right or wrong. Even as you silently stand in a crowded elevator, your lack of eye contact with fellow passengers communicates your unwillingness to interact. Your unspoken messages, even when you are asleep, provide cues that others interpret. Remember: People judge you by your behavior, not your intent. Even in well-established interpersonal relationships, you may be evoking an unintended response by your behavior.

Interpersonal Communication is Irreversible

“Disregard that last statement made by the witness,” instructs the judge. Yet the clever lawyer knows that once her client has told the jury her husband gave her a black eye during an argument, the client cannot really ‘take it back,’ and the jury cannot really disregard it. This principle applies to all forms of communication. We may try to modify the meaning of a spoken message by saying something like “Oh, I really didn’t mean it.” But in most cases, the damage has been done. Once created, communication has the physical property of matter; it can’t be uncreated. As the helical model in Figure 1.4 suggests, once interpersonal communication begins, it never loops back on itself. Instead, it continues to be shaped by the events, experiences, and thoughts of the communication partners. A Russian proverb nicely summarizes the point: “Once a word goes out of your mouth, you can never swallow it again.

Interpersonal Communication Is Irreversible

This helical model shows that interpersonal communication never loops back on itself. Once it begins, it expands infinitely as the communication partners contribute their thoughts and experiences to the exchange.

Because interpersonal communication is irreversible, it’s a myth to assume that messages can be taken back like erasing information from a page or hitting the delete key on your computer. “How many times do I have to tell you not to surf the Internet while you’re on the job?” “Can’t you read? It’s in the syllabus.” “Are you deaf? I’ve already told you that I love you a hundred times!” Each of these exasperated communicators seems to believe that information is the same thing as communication. But information is not communication. Presenting information doesn’t make people “get” your meaning. Like the proverbial tree that falls silently in the forest because no one is there to hear it, a message is not necessarily communication just because you’ve expressed it. So you can’t take a message back simply because you erased it – the meaning already has been created.

Interpersonal Communication is Complicated

No form of communication is simple. If any were, we would know how to reduce the number of misunderstandings and conflicts in our world. One of the purposes of communication, according to communication theorists, is to reduce our uncertainty about what is happening at any given moment. Because of the variables involved in interpersonal exchanges, even simple requests are extremely complex. Additionally, communication theorists have noted that whenever you communicate with another person, at least six “people” are actually involved: (1) who you think you are; (2) who you think the other person is; (3) who you think the other person thinks you are; (4) who the other person thinks he or she is; (5) who the other person thinks you are; and (6) who the other person thinks you think he or she is. Whew! And when you add more people to the interaction, it becomes even more involved.

Moreover, when humans communicate, they interpret information from others as symbols. A symbol is a word, sound, or visual image that represents something else, such as a thought, concept, or object; it can have various meanings and interpretations. Language is a system of symbols. In English, for example, the word (symbol) for cow does not look at all like a cow; someone, some-where, decided that cow should mean a beast that chews its cud and gives milk. The reliance on symbols to communicate poses a communication challenge; you are often misinterpreted. Sometimes you don’t know the code. Only if you are up to date on contemporary slang will you know, for example, that “fo’ shizzle” means “certainly,” “wikidemia” is a term paper entirely researched on Wikipedia.org, and “brodown” is a boys’ night out.

Messages are not always interpreted as we intend them. Osmo Wiio, a Scandinavian communication scholar, points out the messiness of communicating with others when he suggests the following maxims:

• If communication can fail, it will.
• If a message can be understood in different ways, it will be understood in just that way which does the most harm.
• There is always somebody who knows better than you what you meant by your message.
• The more communication there is, the more difficult it is for communication to succeed.

Although we are not as pessimistic as Professor Wiio, we do suggest that the task of understanding each other is challenging.

Because interpersonal communication is complicated, it’s a myth to assume that there are always simple solutions to every interpersonal communication problem. Yes, sometimes simply saying “I’m sorry” or “I forgive you” can melt tension. But because multiple factors result in the creation of meaning in people’s minds, it’s not accurate to assume that there are always simple solutions to communication problems. As we’ve noted, communication is a trans-active process anchored in systems theory, in which every element in the process is connected to all the other elements. Taking time to clearly express a message and then having someone listen and accurately respond is a multifaceted, multistep process.

Communication is complicated.

Interpersonal Communication is Governed by Rules

According to communication researcher Susan Shimanoff, a rule is a “followable prescription that indicates what behavior is obligated, preferred, or prohibited in certain contexts.” The rules that help define appropriate and inappropriate communication in any given situation may be explicit or implicit. For your interpersonal communication class, explicit rules are probably spelled out in your syllabus. But your instructor has other rules that are more implicit. They are not written or verbalized, because you learned them long ago: Only one person speaks at a time, you raise your hand to be called on, you do not send text messages during class.

Interpersonal communication rules are developed by the people involved in the interaction and by the culture in which the individuals are communicating. Many times, we learn communication rules from experience, by observing and interacting with others.

British researcher Michael Argyle and his colleagues asked people to identify general rules for relationship development and maintenance and then rate their importance. The study yielded the following most important rules:

• Respect each other’s privacy.
• Don’t reveal each other’s secrets.
• Look the other person in the eye during conversation.
• Don’t criticize the other person publicly.

Although communication is governed by rules, it’s a myth that the rules are always clear and that one person determines the rules and can modify the meaning of a relationship. Although rules are always present, they may not be clear to each person in the relationship. You thought it was OK to bring your dog to a casual pizza date. Your partner thought it was crude and thoughtless. It takes communication to uncover rules and expectations. Few of us learn relationship rules by copying them from a book. Most of us learn these rules from experience, through observing and interacting with family members and friends. Individuals who grow up in environments in which these rules are not observed may not know how to behave in close relationships. In addition, relationships have both implicit and explicit rules that involve more than one person in the relationship. The rules of interpersonal relationships are mutually defined and agreed on. Expectations and rules are continually renegotiated as the relationship unfolds. So although rules exist, they may not be clear or shared by the individuals in the relationship.

Interpersonal Communication Involves both Content and Relationship Dimensions

What you say (your words) and how you say it (your tone of voice, amount of eye contact, facial expression, and posture) can reveal much about the true meaning of your message. If one of your roommates loudly and abruptly bellows, “HEY, DORK! CLEAN THIS ROOM!” and another roommate uses the same verbal message but more gently and playfully says, “Hey, dork. Clean this room,” both are communicating a message aimed at achieving the same outcome. But the two messages have different relationship cues. The shouted message suggests that roommate number one may be frustrated that the room is still full of leftovers from last night’s pizza party, whereas roommate number two’s teasing request suggests he or she may be fondly amused by your untidiness. What you say and how you say it provide information not only about content but also about the relationship you have with the other person.

Content Message

The content of a communication message consists of the information, ideas, or suggested action that the speaker wishes to share. You may think that your messages to others are primarily about content, but that’s not the whole story. You also provide clues about your relationship with others.

Relationship Message

The relationship dimension of a communication message offers cues about the emotions, attitudes, and amount of power and control the speaker feels with regard to the other person. This distinction between the content of a message (what is said) and relationship cues (how the message is expressed) explains why a printed transcript can seem to reveal quite a different meaning from a spoken message.

Metacommunication Message

Because messages have both content and relationship dimensions, one dimension can modify or even contradict the other dimension. Communication theorists have a word that describes how we can communicate about our communication: metacommunication. Stated in the simplest way, metacommunication is communication about communication, and it can be nonverbal or verbal. Accurately decoding unspoken or verbalized metamessages helps you understand what people really mean and can help you ‘listen between the lines’ of what someone is expressing.

You can express an idea nonverbally (for example, by smiling to communicate that you are pleased), and you can also express your positive feeling verbally (for example, by saying, “I’m happy to be here”). But sometimes your nonverbal communication can contradict your verbal message. You can say “Oh, that’s just great” and use your voice to indicate just the opposite of what the verbal content of the message means. The sarcasm communicated by the tone of your voice (a relationship cue) modifies the meaning of your verbal message (the content of your message).

In addition to nonverbal cues, which provide communication about communication, you can also use words to talk explicitly about your message. For example, when you can ask, “Is what I’m saying bothering you?” You are using a metamessage to check on how your message is being understood. Here’s another example of verbal metacommunication: “I’d like to talk with you about the way we argue.” Again, you are using communication to talk about communication. Talking about the way you talk can help clarify misunderstandings. Being aware of the metamessage, in both its verbal and its nonverbal forms, can help improve the accuracy of your interpretations of the meaning of message content, as well as enhance the quality of your relationships with others.

Because meaning is created in the heart and mind of the communicator, it’s a myth to think that meaning resides in a word. Given the potential for miscommunication as the content and relationship dimensions of a message create meaning, it is important to remember that the ultimate meaning for a word or expression is not in the word or gesture but within the person who creates the meaning. Being aware of the metamessage can help you better interpret a message and derive meaning from it. Simply because you said something doesn’t mean your partner understood you. Your vocal inflection, facial expression, or gesture may have created a different interpretation of what you intended. Meaning is in people, not in words or gestures.

Principle	Myth	Reality
Interpersonal communication connects us to others.	All interpersonal relationship problems are always communication problems.	We may understand what someone means and feel connected to them, but we may still disagree with them.
Interpersonal communication is irreversible.	A message can be taken back because when information has been presented, communication has occurred.	We can’t simply hit “delete” and erase communication. Communication is more than the information in a message; it creates meaning for others.
Interpersonal communication is complicated.	There are always simple solutions to all communication problems.	Because of the complicated nature of how meaning is created, there are not always simple ways to untangle communication problems. It often takes time, skill, and patience to enhance human understanding.
Interpersonal communication is governed by rules.	One person can resolve interpersonal communication problems.	The communication rules are developed mutually between all people in the relationship. Understanding how the rules are developed and interpreted can help minimize misunderstandings.
Interpersonal communication involves both content and relationship dimensions.	Meanings are in words and gestures.	Meanings reside within a person based on the interpretation of both the content and the relationship dimensions of a message and how the metamessage is interpreted.