{"id":461,"date":"2011-06-04T20:24:41","date_gmt":"2011-06-04T20:24:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/?p=461"},"modified":"2018-12-07T15:12:20","modified_gmt":"2018-12-07T15:12:20","slug":"perception-checking-the-key-to-successful-communication-and-co-construction-of-identities","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/perception-checking-the-key-to-successful-communication-and-co-construction-of-identities\/","title":{"rendered":"Perception Checking: The key to successful communication and co-construction of identities"},"content":{"rendered":"

by Sherry Umlah
\n<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

This synthesis writing\u00a0illustrates the role that perception and interpretation have in co-constructing identities and effectively communicating. It is based on the following six articles:<\/p>\n

\u201cInhaling: Perception,\u201d by John Stewart, Karen E. Zediker & Saskia Witteborn<\/strong>
\nIn this article, the authors\u2019 illustrated how our perception processes can affect our interpersonal communication.\u00a0 A key concept, covered by the authors, addressed how inference-making is influenced by stereotyping, impression formation, and attribution.<\/p>\n

\u201cConstructing Identities,\u201d by John Stewart, Karen E. Zediker & Saskia Witteborn<\/strong>
\nThe authors\u2019 purpose for writing this article was to debunk the theory that we are separate, singular selves.\u00a0 One key concept, illustrated by the authors, is how our identities are relational and multidimensional, and how we continuously co-construct our selves through the identity negotiation or identity management part of communication.<\/p>\n

Forming Online Identities, by Andrew F. Wood and Matthew J. Smith<\/strong>
\nIn this article, Wood and Smith distinguished among anonymity, pseudonymity and identity, and discussed the ways we construct and alter our online identities.\u00a0 The key concept they addressed was the suggestion that computer-mediated communication allows us to construct identities through language and alter how our identity is perceived by others.<\/p>\n

\u201cMother-Daughter E-mail and IM Communication,\u201d by Deborah Tannen<\/strong>
\nDeborah Tannen\u2019s purpose for writing this article was to describe how electronic communication can be used by mothers and daughters to create and negotiate the interplay of connection and control defining their relationship.\u00a0 One concept that Tannen outlined in her article suggested that using computer-mediated communication has liabilities, including a lack of feedback through reflected appraisal, facial expression, and vocal tone.<\/p>\n

\u201cGendered Standpoints on Personal Relationships,\u201d by Julia T. Wood<\/strong>
\nIn this article, the author describes stereotypical male and female standpoints on personal relationships and how they are formed via socialization within gendered environments. One concept the author addressed is the suggestion that men and women experience and express intimacy differently, which can lead to misconceptions about each other\u2019s view of the relationship.<\/p>\n

\u201cMindful Listening,\u201d by Rebecca Shafir<\/strong>
\nShafir\u2019s purpose for writing this article was to explain how multi-tasking can prevent effective listening and how being mindful can have a positive impact on our communication. One of the key concepts Shafir focused on in this article was her definition of a good listener.\u00a0 She defines a good listener as one who is mindful of a wide variety of listening skills including the ability to receive messages accurately and interpret them (the words, gestures, and facial expressions) in an unbiased manner.<\/p>\n

Correlations<\/strong>
\nThe repeating theme throughout all of these articles illustrates how communication and identities can be affected by our perception and interpretation of others\u2019 messages.\u00a0 As authors Stewart, Zediker, and Witteborn point out in \u201cConstructing Identities,\u201d we are continuously co-constructing our identities, whether it\u2019s in face-to-face communication or, as authors Wood and Smith would suggest in \u201cForming Online Identities,\u201d through using computer-mediated communication.\u00a0 We play a role in forming others\u2019 self-concepts when ascribing traits to others. Simultaneously, we manage our own identity based on the reflected appraisal we receive through others\u2019 verbal, non-verbal, and linguistic cues.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The accuracy of our perceptions of the messages we receive determine the success of our ability to co-create our identities and communicate effectively.\u00a0 As Wood and Smith illustrated, in computer-mediated communication channels we rely on language to construct and alter how our identity is perceived by others.\u00a0 Deborah Tannen, author of \u201cMother-Daughter E-mail and IM Communication,\u201d would agree, and points out that computer-mediated communication has liabilities that can affect the accuracy of our perceptions, including a lack of reflected appraisal, and a lack of facial expression and vocal tone.\u00a0 Wood and Smith suggested this lack of feedback provides for anonymity and allows us the opportunity to form alternate online identities, or pseudonyms.\u00a0 However, as the article \u201cConstructing Identities\u201d points out: identities are relational and multidimensional and rely on others to continuously co-construct them.\u00a0 Without reflected appraisal, facial expression, and vocal tone, our perceptions of identity and ability to co-construct an identity are significantly hindered.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

In addition to the effects that the liabilities of computer-mediated communication can have on perception of identities and communication, there are also differences in gender that impact our ability to successfully interpret messages. It\u2019s important to note, that these differences don\u2019t change just because we\u2019ve changed the channel of communication we use.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

As author Julia T. Wood points out in \u201cGendered Standpoints on Personal Relationships,\u201d there are stereotypical differences in how men and women communicate and perceive.\u00a0 As an example, women use the nonverbal cue of head nodding to send the message that they are listening and encourage the speaker to continue.\u00a0 Men tend to misinterpret this nonverbal gesture as a form of agreement with what they\u2019re saying.\u00a0 Conversational styles vary between gender roles as well, with men leaning toward more adversarial conversations and debating or current events, and women focusing more on feelings and discussing relationships.\u00a0 In fact, women generate feelings of intimacy through talking about their relationship with their partners. However, men see no point in communicating about their relationship unless a problem exists.\u00a0 For men, communication is used to obtain objectives.\u00a0 These differences can lead men and women to perceive each other incorrectly and ascribe inaccurate traits to each other\u2019s self-concept or identity.\u00a0 Men may perceive women as being dissatisfied with the relationship because it seems there is always a need to discuss it.\u00a0 Women may interpret men as disinterested in the relationship and not committed because they don\u2019t want to talk about it.
\nOf course, all of these gender differences in communication are based on stereotypes.\u00a0 Men and women might not adhere to these stereotypes by adopting a gender role other than their biological sex.\u00a0 This makes it even more difficult to form accurate perceptions, since, as the article \u201cInhaling: Perceptions\u201d points out, we base a lot of our perceptions and inference-making on stereotypes.\u00a0 If we ascribe the gender role of \u2018woman\u2019 to the person we\u2019re speaking with and she has, instead, adopted the gender role of male, we are bound to misinterpret her messages as we make stereotypes about our inaccurate perception of her gender role.\u00a0 So, regardless of whether we\u2019re aware of these gender differences or not, the fact that they may not always apply still makes us liable to make inaccurate perceptions and misinterpretations.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Despite the fact that it might seem impossible to accurately perceive and interpret others\u2019 messages, I still agree with the belief of Rebecca Shafir, author of \u201cMindful Listening,\u201d that mindful listening can improve our communication with others and help us to receive and interpret messages more accurately. Although there are too many cross-cultural and cross-gender differences in our conversational styles and mannerisms to accurately interpret messages without perception checking, mindful listening gives us the next best opportunity we have for accurate perception and interpretation.\u00a0 Simply being mindful of communication variances in groups, such as gender, age, and culture can help us to remember to use good listening skills that help us measure our understanding of the messages, such as paraphrasing and questioning.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/strong>
\nThese readings reinforce the importance of perception checking and being mindful of the potential for, or high likelihood of, misinterpretations to occur.\u00a0 Prior to reviewing these articles, I would have considered my perceptions and interpretations as highly accurate.\u00a0 I am very empathic and intuitive.\u00a0 However, I wasn\u2019t aware of the number of variables that can impact our ability to perceive and interpret accurately.<\/p>\n

We perceive the world and try to make sense of it through stereotyping, impression formation, and attribution.\u00a0 \u00a0When receiving a wide variety of verbal, nonverbal, and linguistic cues, we give our best effort to interpret these messages.\u00a0 However, our perceptions can be affected by so many variables, including gender role, and our interpretations are founded on the limitations of our cognitive complexity.\u00a0 These limitations are emphasized even greater when we attempt to perceive and interpret messages that we receive via computer-mediated channels, which can lack feedback like facial expressions and vocal tone.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s evident to me, after reviewing these articles, to be a successful communicator it\u2019s absolutely critical, in both computer-mediated communication and face-to-face communication, in cross-gender and same-gender communication, that we strive to practice mindful listening, implement more perception checks, use paraphrasing and questioning, and be fully aware of the liabilities of stereotypes and communication channels.\u00a0 I\u2019d almost venture to say that all messages could be considered equivocal if the two communicators have extremely differing frameworks from which they perceive and interpret communication.\u00a0 While it\u2019s innate and sometimes efficient for us to use stereotypes and nonverbal cues to perceive and interpret messages, I don\u2019t think we can ever truly guarantee our understanding of another\u2019s message without perception checking.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Sherry Umlah This synthesis writing\u00a0illustrates the role that perception and interpretation have in co-constructing identities and effectively communicating. It is based on the following six articles: \u201cInhaling: Perception,\u201d by John Stewart, Karen E. Zediker & Saskia Witteborn In this article, the authors\u2019 illustrated how our perception processes can affect our interpersonal communication.\u00a0 A key […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[75],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-461","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-writing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/461","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=461"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/461\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":462,"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/461\/revisions\/462"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=461"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=461"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sherryumlah.com\/home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=461"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}