Dr
Assignment 1
WR Assignment
Guiding Question:
How does the communication styles effect relationships
Integrated Summary:
Communication or conversational style is the way in which people interact and communicate with others through verbal and non-verbal mediums. It is the purposeful way of sharing information in which the receiver may not exactly understand what the communicator has to say. It may be due to cultural or language differences (Gareis, Merkin & Goldman, 2011). Hence, stress, noise, misunderstandings and conflicts need to be removed from communication process and channel to improve the bond of friendship or acquaintance or relationship between the people.
Communication style is actually an art which determines how well one is able to handle and manage the relationships at different settings- work environment, family settings, peer group, long-distance relationships, marital settings, social circle and others. Communication style affects relationships because it is not just the use of words but also the entire body language and the use of cues and non-verbal signals which reflect the intentions of communicator. Visual modes and electronic mediums like emails and video chats are also forms of communication that help maintain relations in long-distance settings.
Talking specifically about long-distance relationships, communication in these settings lacks the opportunity of personal interactions. Though with the use of social networking and media tools like Facebook, Twitter and Skype, people can develop connections with strangers and even maintain established relationships. However, the frequency of media use determines the strength of such relations and also the availability of such media resources at both ends to facilitate long-distance communication.
According to Foucault, Vashevko, Bennett & Contractor (2014), online friendship networks should also be used as an opportunity domain for personal interaction. This feat can be achieved by keeping open communication lines. Relationships should be committed to and regular meeting and schedule should be structured to avoid distraction.
In the choice of an appropriate communication style, several other factors play an important role in developing the relationship along the continuum of expectations and expressions. Logistics issues crop up when the parties to communication are located apart or have family acceptance concerns (Brody, 2013).
In a couple of studies and researches, it was found that even freshmen or first-time internet users assess the availability of virtual resources before establishing and developing relations with strangers or known people. The tendency of turning arm’s length relations into close ones is contingent on how easily people can get access to such resources and increase the frequency of media use to compensate for the lack of emotions in computer-mediated communications (McEwan & Guerrero, 2010).
In such communications, the level of richness of media also affects the quality of relationships since possibilities of sending dynamic text messages and video calling open up that lead to personal interaction and remove misunderstandings from the relationship (Sheer, 2011).
Differences in age and gender, intellectual level, value system, attitudes and personality and culture lead to compatibility issues in relationships. In marital settings, such issues damage the frequency of communication and bring distortion in the level of affection.
Long-distance and marital relations also suffer from commitment issues when one party is unable to devote sufficient time or resources to maintain the pace of interaction. Sometimes, people are ineffective at demonstrating their affection towards the other party due to ego, perception of low relationship quality (Arroyo & Segrin, 2011), ulterior motives or malice intentions (Jin, 2013).
A healthy relationship is marked by mutual trust, respect, equality and freedom of expression. Whatever style of communication is chosen, it is to be noted that the quality of relationship developed depends on the interpretation of subtle meanings in the messages shared through emotions, feelings, signals and non-verbal cues. Such interpretation to be successful and accurate needs personal level interaction to avoid misunderstandings and possibilities of information distortion (Foucault, Vashevko, Bennett & Contractor, 2014).
This calls for a friendly communication style that is infused with a spirit of cooperation and empathy for others. The motive here should be to smoothen the relationship and handle misunderstandings at their earliest (Associations among friendship satisfaction, self-verification, self-enhancement, and friends' communication skill, 2012). The affiliative style aims at bringing people together to resolve problems in a collective and collaborative manner.
The competitive style, on the other hand, puts a party under dominating position when the use of power and authority is made to control the relationship (Miczo, Mariani & Donahue, 2011).
Relationships are also affected when people choose to be direct or indirect in their communication styles.
Direct style is most of the time honest and straightforward with no hidden or malice intentions on the part of the communicator. It is also low on abstract or non-verbal communication. Indirect communication, on the opposite end of continuum, is more subtle and implies that the listener is good at deciphering the non-verbal cues and signals given by the communicator (Wright & Patterson, 2006).
It can thus be summed up that whatever be the communication style, what matters is the ability to handle differences and avoid polarization by being more flexible in communication approach and being aware of the importance of understanding in relationships.
Annotated Bibliography:
Brody, N. (2013). Absence—and mediated Communication—Makes the heart grow fonder: Clarifying the predictors of satisfaction and commitment in long-distance friendships. Communication Research Reports, 30(4), 323-332. doi:10.1080/08824096.2013.837388
The heart grows fonder in long-distance friendships. This analysis conducts a research using 592 participants who completed an online survey. Depending on what was ask the researchers would remove the participants that didn’t fall into a specific category. The research was based on computer-mediated communication which lacks the involvement of emotions and personal interactions. The study revealed that longer time duration between the uses of media for such communications affects long-distance relationships.
McEwan, B., & Guerrero, L. K. (2010). Freshmen engagement through communication: Predicting friendship formation strategies and perceived availability of network resources from communication skills. Communication Studies, 61(4), 445-463. doi:10.1080/10510974.2010.493762
This study was conducted to understand the perceptions of freshmen regarding the availability of resources in social media network to establish friendships and connections. Use of questionnaires helped identify different sets of communication skills exhibited by freshmen that helped them in utilizing personal and instrumental resources available online.
Sheer, V. C. (2011). Teenagers' use of MSN features, discussion topics, and online friendship development: The impact of media richness and communication control. Communication Quarterly, 59(1), 82-103. doi:10.1080/01463373.2010.525702
This study was undertaken to assess the impact of the level of communication control and media richness in online friendship development. Taking the specific case of MSN, it was found that media richness in online friendship development positively affects social communication and reduces the time gap in finding a friend online. With the help of dynamic tools such as video calling, long-distance virtual relationships can be turned into close ones.
References
Associations among friendship satisfaction, self-verification, self-enhancement, and friends' communication skill. (2012). Conference Papers -- International Communication Association, , 1-35.
Arroyo, A., & Segrin, C. (2011). The relationship between self- and other-perceptions of communication competence and friendship quality. Communication Studies, 62(5), 547-562. doi:10.1080/10510974.2011.580037
Brody, N. (2013). Absence—and mediated Communication—Makes the heart grow fonder: Clarifying the predictors of satisfaction and commitment in long-distance friendships. Communication Research Reports, 30(4), 323-332. doi:10.1080/08824096.2013.837388
Foucault Welles, B., Vashevko, A., Bennett, N., & Contractor, N. (2014). Dynamic models of communication in an online friendship network. Communication Methods & Measures, 8(4), 223-243. doi:10.1080/19312458.2014.967843
Gareis, E., Merkin, R., & Goldman, J. (2011). Intercultural friendship: Linking communication variables and friendship success. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 40(2), 153-171. doi:10.1080/17475759.2011.581034
Jin, B. (2013). Hurtful texting in friendships: Satisfaction buffers the distancing effects of intention. Communication Research Reports, 30(2), 148-156. doi:10.1080/08824096.2012.763026
McEwan, B., & Guerrero, L. K. (2010). Freshmen engagement through communication: Predicting friendship formation strategies and perceived availability of network resources from communication skills. Communication Studies, 61(4), 445-463. doi:10.1080/10510974.2010.493762
Miczo, N., Mariani, T., & Donahue, C. (2011). The strength of strong ties: Media multiplexity, communication motives, and the maintenance of geographically close friendships. Communication Reports, 24(1), 12-24. doi:10.1080/08934215.2011.555322
Sheer, V. C. (2011). Teenagers' use of MSN features, discussion topics, and online friendship development: The impact of media richness and communication control. Communication Quarterly, 59(1), 82-103. doi:10.1080/01463373.2010.525702
Wright, K. B., & Patterson, B. R. (2006). Socio-emotional selectivity theory and the macro-dynamics of friendship: The role of friendship style and communication in friendship across the lifespan. Communication Research Reports, 23(3), 163-170. doi:10.1080/08824090600796377
