×
Log in to StudySoup
Get Full Access to CU - AS 1210100 - Study Guide - Final
Join StudySoup for FREE
Get Full Access to CU - AS 1210100 - Study Guide - Final

Already have an account? Login here
×
Reset your password

CU / Asian / AS 1210100 / what is communication?

what is communication?

what is communication?

Description

School: University of Colorado
Department: Asian
Course: COMM 1210100-127:Perspectives on Human Communication
Professor: Ruth hickerson
Term: Fall 2015
Tags:
Cost: 50
Name: COMM 1210 FINAL EXAM STUDY GUIDE
Description: final exam study guide for 5/5/2016
Uploaded: 05/03/2016
28 Pages 7 Views 17 Unlocks
Reviews

Joshuah Lind II (Rating: )

If Becca isn't already a tutor, they should be. Haven't had any of this stuff explained to me as clearly as this was. I appreciate the help!



COMM 1210 Final Exam Study Guide 


what is communication?



What you need to know in order to do well on this exam:

1. The key concepts, main ideas, and communication problems related to  each reading.

2. The human communication perspective related to each reading as  identified in this class. (provided)

3. How the readings are similar and different in relation to the main ideas  and findings of the authors.

4. The communication problem and social problem with which each  reading is concerned. Where is there overlap between the readings? Where  are there differences?

PART I

Perspective: COMMUNICATION AND messages, skills, & relationships

Reading:

McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (2009). Messages: The communication  skills book. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications.

Main Ideas: (fill in)

> Communication as defined in Messages: communication consists of  sending/receiving well crafted messages to/from others


what is mercurian rhetoric?



We also discuss several other topics like Who won the Loving v Virginia case?

- comm is a SOCIAL activity

- comm is not “just talk” → there is verbal and nonverbal communication  - comm often has immediate social/ material consequences - comm is a habitual activity → humans, by nature, are creatures of habit  - changing these comm habits take a lot energy and time  Don't forget about the age old question of What are examples of facts?

> Basic Comm skills:

- listening (to “really listen”) = openness to unfamiliar perspectives with  someone

- appreciation for their otherness

 - nonverbal and verbal confirmation that you are listening (nodding your  head or saying “I understand”)

Communication Problem: (fill in)

Many of the skills don’t translate well into real life  

Perspective -- Communication and sending effective messages, skills, &  relationships:

Communication is the sending and receiving of messages by an individual in  order to influence others and is effective only when the correct skill/tool is  used.


what is enstrom's theory?



______________________________________________________________________________ PART II If you want to learn more check out What is the meaning of quantity supplied?
Don't forget about the age old question of who is Thucydides?

Perspective: COMMUNICATION AND SHARED SOCIAL SPACE Reading: 

Cameron, D. (2004). Communication culture: Issues for health and social  care. In S. Barett, C. Komaromy, M. Robb, & A. Rogers (Eds.),  Communication, relationships and care: A reader (pp. 63-73). London, U.K.:  Routledge.

Main Ideas: (fill in)

 >Communication and reality

- traditional view: we use communication to describe a world of facts that  exists independently from us, the observers

- constitutive view: we use communication to make sense of the world  together in order to be able to exist and act together. 

- constitutive view of communication: we, humans, create our own reality  together by consistently applying language and other communication  resources to our shared experience.

- communication is not a mere tool for expressing social reality but is also a  means of creating it.

- Relationships, identities, and tasks are in the communication (“constituted  by it”) rather than in the relationships or between two or more people  (“containing it”)

*SO, meaning does not exist solely between the two people in  interaction. It is part of a larger social system...nothing really exists till we talk about it.

>What does it mean to be part of a communication culture? - we talk a lot about talk; talk informs and reflects talk; we tend to believe that it is always good to talk it out or talk about it; our communication affects our  communication (both ways) Don't forget about the age old question of What is hybridoma?

- because we are so focused on tlk and communication, it seems natural to  judge talk as “good” or “bad--less good”

- most of aspire to--or believe we should aspire to be better communicators so we are highly receptive to expert advice on the matter.

> Communication culture and Deborah Cameron We also discuss several other topics like What is Condorcet’s paradox?

- “a culture obsessed with communication and the skills that it supposedly  demands” (p.64).  

- “the mundane social activity of talking...has been redefined as a set of skills  requiring effort and expert guidance to master” (p.64).

- the rise of communication culture:

- normative ideas about communication → communication experts - experts → communication as a set of skills/key to happiness → commodifying  communication  

> Selling communication expertise

- how is communication expertise being sold?

- communication skills/principles?

- actual communication in actual contexts?

- communication and becoming a better person?

- qualifications?

>Origins of communication culture

- economic (rise of service jobs in the West) → branding

- if there is no “thing” we are producing, then what is our business?

- dissolution of traditional societies → the self as a “reflexive project”  (“personal growth”)

- traditional societies-- stay in one place your whole life among people who  have known you from birth  

- the dissolution of these traditional societies→ we continually have to reinvent ourselves

- Thus, the self becomes a “reflexive project” (Giddens)

>Self-reflexivity

- Having an ongoing conversation with one’s whole self about what one is  experiencing as one is experiencing it.

- to be self-reflexive is to engage in this meta-level of feeling and thought  while being in the moment

- The strength of being reflexive is that we can make the quality of our  relationships better at that time in that encounter, without having to wait for  our next interaction.

- living in a communication culture heightens our awareness of how we ought  to communicate, how we “ought” to communicate and behave in  interactions.

- reflexivity increases our awareness of the consequences of not abiding by  socially constructed rules and norms of interactions.

- when we are self aware of our incompetence and the ways that affects  others and our relationships, we can adjust our behavior.  

> “Good communication” and therapy talk:

- speak for yourself

- don't judge others on their views

- listen to others with an open mind

- respect and affirm others’ feelings

- don't tell other people what to do

- clarify above all (“keep clarifying”)  

- small talk, chit-chat pave the way toward “good conversations” >Basic tenets of communication culture

communication…

- ...is important, it can be a solution to social problems

- ...can only be done “right” with the help of expert advice about skills → the  magical power to influence

- ...must be evaluated (people need to be trained)

- ...must be regulated/standardized in institutional settings → branding >What is the problem?

the dominant “communication skills” model…

- ...has very little to do with actual communication (there is not one “right”  way to communicate)

- ...can serve to hide asymmetrical power relations (e.g., “be non-judgmental”  and to “co-operate”)

- ...leaves the meaning of “effective” communication and related “skills”  vague/ambiguous→ assessment can be meaningless  

Concepts: (review, define, explain these)

Interactional model: communicative patterns typical for a speech  community

“Communication culture”: living in a communication culture heightens  our awareness of how we ought to communicate, how we “ought” to  communicate and behave in interactions.

>Basic tenets of communication culture

communication…

- ...is important, it can be a solution to social problems

- ...can only be done “right” with the help of expert advice about skills → the  magical power to influence

- ...must be evaluated (people need to be trained)

- ...must be regulated/standardized in institutional settings → branding Self-reflexivity and Self as reflexive project:  

- Having an ongoing conversation with one’s whole self about what one is  experiencing as one is experiencing it.

- to be self-reflexive is to engage in this meta-level of feeling and thought  while being in the moment

- The strength of being reflexive is that we can make the quality of our  relationships better at that time in that encounter, without having to wait for  our next interaction.

- living in a communication culture heightens our awareness of how we ought  to communicate, how we “ought” to communicate and behave in  interactions.

- reflexivity increases our awareness of the consequences of not abiding by  socially constructed rules and norms of interactions.

- when we are self aware of our incompetence and the ways that affects  others and our relationships, we can adjust our behavior.  

Therapy talk:

- speak for yourself

- don't judge others on their views

- listen to others with an open mind

- respect and affirm others’ feelings

- don't tell other people what to do

- clarify above all (“keep clarifying”)  

- small talk, chit-chat pave the way toward “good conversations” Examples of shared social spaces:

- health and care facility-- Cameron

- workplace-- Tracy

- College-- Engstrom

Communication Problem: (fill in)

the dominant “communication skills” model…

- ...has very little to do with actual communication (there is not one “right”  way to communicate)

- ...can serve to hide asymmetrical power relations (e.g., “be non-judgmental”  and to “co-operate”)

- ...leaves the meaning of “effective” communication and related “skills”  vague/ambiguous→ assessment can be meaningless  

Perspective – Communication and shared social space:

Dynamics of interaction (knowledge, power, skill) determine the  appropriateness of a skill as well as who gets to use what communication  resources, where, when, how, and to what ends.

_____________________________

 Reading:

Engstrom, C.L. (2012). “Yes…, but I was drunk”: Alcohol references and the  (re)production of masculinity on a college campus. Communication  Quarterly, 60, 403-423. doi:10.1080/01463373.2012.688790 Main Ideas: (fill in)

 >Engstrom’s theory

- Shifts the focus from how we can stop binge drinking on campus and asks  instead:

- “How do students, through everyday talk, collectively make sense of these  actions?”  

>How is this related to shared social space?

- Speech codes are created and recreated in particular speech communities. - Speech community--a cultural group that has shared rules of speaking and  interpretation of speech performance

- Understanding of what is normal or acceptable (i.e. the rules of drinking  culture) is learned and practiced through social interaction (i.e. talking about  drinking, and actually drinking)

>Engstrom’s Findings

- Students adhere to the cultural patterns of speaking regarding alcohol  references, which have at least four identifiable rules.

- If you are part of this particular speech community, you likely know the rules  (speech codes)

>4 Identifiable Rules  

- Rule #1: Accept references to alcohol “as is”

- Rule #2: Validations of references to alcohol  

- Rule #3: Refer to alcohol positively  

- Rule #4: Referencing alcohol should point to normalcy  

>Rules in action

- Alcohol use excuses behavior that, in any other context, would be seen as  antisocial and dispreferred

- Urinating in public

- Vandalism

- Sexual misconduct  

- “But I was drunk!”

>Communicative Competence

- If you know the rules, you can participate without incident in the  communicative event  

- Engstrom did not understand the rule about not asking for specific details  (like how much someone drank)

- This marked him as communicatively incompetent in this context - It also marked him as someone who was not part of this particular speech  community (college-age students discussion drinking and drinking-related  behavior)

>Practices that reinforce hegemonic masculinity

- Men engage in more aggressive, violent, and risk-taking behavior - “That's just how they are”

- Talking about this behavior in this way and then using alcohol consumption  to excuse it only reinforces it as acceptable gender behavior  >Dominant view: students drink too much, and they often engage in  misconduct as a result

- Engstrom: this is a misrepresentation of what actually happens - In talking about alcohol consumption, students create a “natural”  relationship between excessive drinking and misconduct (“yes, I did that, but I was drunk”)

>Engstrom conclusion

- People use human/ social facts about masculinity (and femininity) to  accomplish social goals through communication (such as “being cool”) - Engstrom: not all college-age males enact (or support) the dominant type of  masculinity  

- Many college-age women enact (or support) the dominant type of  masculinity  

>Communication and social change

- Constitutive view: change the way people talk--change human/social facts-- change (social) reality

- Engstrom: change the way students talk about alcohol, they will be less likely to engage in (or support) drunken misconduct  

Concepts: (review, define, explain these)

Speech community: a cultural group that has shared rules of speaking and  interpretation of speech performance

Speech codes: rules for producing culturally recognizable, appropriate  speech→ are created and recreated in particular speech communities Gender versus sex:  

- Gender: refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and  attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and  women...what various social groups know to be a recognizable man/woman  (human/social fact)

- Sex: biological features (physical fact) → Sex refers to the biological and  physiological characteristics that define men and women

Gender as performative:  

How do we “do feminine” or “do masculine”?

- Speech

- Dress

- Appearance

- Language

- Nonverbals

- Behavior

- And so on…

*Most of us have been socialized to understand that masculine and feminine  traits and behaviors are and how to appropriate and perform them

>Gender as Performative (in Engstrom’s article)

- Men performances of hegemonic masculinity include aggressiveness,  toughness, lewdness

- Within the college context, women can also reinforce hegemonic masculinity - Seeking relationships only with “strong men”

- Leaving men’s problematic practices unchallenged when they reference - alcohol usage to explain another practice (fighting, destruction of property,  rape)

Communicative competence:  

- If you know the rules, you can participate without incident in the  communicative event  

- Engstrom did not understand the rule about not asking for specific details  (like how much someone drank)

- This marked him as communicatively incompetent in this context - It also marked him as someone who was not part of this particular speech  community (college-age students discussion drinking and drinking-related  behavior)

Communication Problem: (fill in)

- The perception of college drinking is that the problem is the alcohol  consumption itself. Engstrom wants to explain how certain habitual ways of  speaking normalize college-age drinking and justify bad choices

- Data show that students’ patterned ways of speaking especially about  drinking, mitigate problematic student behaviors.

- Although such mitigating statements are, at times, by themselves  problematic, they (re)produce a much more troubling masculinity.

Perspective – Communication and shared social space:

Understanding of what is normal or acceptable (i.e., the rules of drinking  culture) is learned and practiced through social interaction (i.e., talking about drinking, and actually drinking).

_____________________________

Reading: 

Tracy, S. J., Lutgen-Sandvik, P., & Alberts, J. K. (2006). Nightmares, demons,  and slaves: exploring the painful metaphors of workplace bullying.  Management Communication Quarterly, 20, 148-185.  

doi:10.1177/0893318906291980

Main Ideas: (fill in)

>Two connections to communication:

1. complaints about bullying often dismissed as “weakness” or “making big deal out of nothing”--communication silences those who suffer  - social world being built: the workplace is where only the fittest survive - the bully’s perspective dominates  

>Making sense of experiences  

how does this relate to communication and shared social space? - metaphors help us understand context by symbolically placing us in another context (it was work but it felt like a war zone)

- metaphors --say more in one word than hundreds of other words >Research question: What does workplace bullying feel like?/ What types of metaphorical language do participants use to describe the emotional experience of bullying?

- taking an inductive approach to research often leads to us amending our RQ - what do I have? what is interesting about it? what does it tell me about the experience of this population?

>Sensemaking and work- life expectations and work as a social space (context)

- this is what work is like

- this is what happens here

- this is how we talk about it

- this is how we behave

- productive, teamwork, respect…

- how do we explain experiences that fall outside of these expectations? what words (symbols) do we use? and why?

- and why reluctant to tell stories that fall outside of expectations? distancing? highlights non-normative reality of situation?

>Bullying

- creates a new kind of social interaction

- reminiscent of schoolyard antics--childish, unfair, no rules or help

- “bully” used to define the people who don't play by the rules - childhood experience adopted by adults to make sense of their experience - but shouldn't schools also be a “safe” social space with rules that prevent this behavior?  

>Comm and workplace bullying  

- Tracy et al. gives examples of metaphors used in workplace bullying  - These examples matter because they constitute the situation - They become how the target sees the situation  

- Different metaphors give the target different options

- For example, even naming it “bullying” highlights the perpetrator’s role in  the abuse, allows to victim to recover their own sense of value >Engstrom reading

- How we talk about experiences influences and is influenced by societal  change  

- This is a difference in how comm scholar (versus a sociologist) would explore  a social phenomenon

- Are societal changes reflected in media representations of the college  experience?

>Campus life in movies: Example

- Then:

- Animal House released in 1978 but was meant to depict 1962 - Women on campus in the 60s were still a minority

- Women often depicted as attending to earn MRS degree

- Now:

- Today, women outnumber men in college enrollment  

- Are women now more often depicted as being serious and high-achieving  students?

- Do women in the film still engage in mostly stereotypical “feminine”  behavior?

*Comm scholars regularly explore issues related to representation of identity - So, we get ideas about what “normal” is (i particular social spaces contexts)  from a variety of sources

- Conklin argues that Animal House changed the expectations first-year  college students had of the college experience (including appropriate and  acceptable behavior)

>What is a man? What is a woman?

- Sex: biological features (physical fact)

- Sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men  and women

>What is masculine? What is feminine?

- Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and  attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women - Gender: what various social groups know to be a recognizable man/woman  (human/social fact)

- Comm scholar Julia Wood attempted to answer the question, “What does it  mean to us as individuals to grow up feminine or masculine in present-day  America?”

- What does research have to say about these experiences? >Feminine

1. Appearance still counts: women are still judged by their looks. Desirable=  pretty, slim, and well-dressed

2. Be sensitive and caring: BE NICE, deferential, and helpful. Care about and  take care of others

3. Negative treatment by others: Women are more often targets of sexual  assault, are more likely to live in poverty, and more likely to face bad job  salary discrimination  

4. Be superwoman: you must have it all. It’s not enough to be a homemaker,  you must also have a career and be a great mother

5. There is no single meaning of feminine anymore. No matter what you do,  you will be applauded by some and criticized by others.

>Masculine

1. Don’t be female: do not act, look, think, or feel like a woman or a girl. Do not show sensitivity or vulnerability

2. Be successful: achieve status. Don’t just be good--be better and more  powerful than your peers. Be a good provider.

3. Be aggressive: you will be rewarded for being a daredevil and a roughneck.  Take a stand; don’t run from confrontation. Be tough.

4. Be sexual: interested in sex at all times. Have a number of sexual partners.  Sexual conquest is a cornerstone of masculinity

5. Be self-reliant: don’t need others. Depend on yourself. Take care of yourself.  Rely on yourself.

>Gender as Performative

- How do we “do feminine” or “do masculine”?

- Speech

- Dress

- Appearance

- Language

- Nonverbals

- Behavior

- And so on..

*Most of us have been socialized to understand that masculine and feminine  traits and behaviors are and how to appropriate and perform them

>Gender as Performative (in Engstrom’s article)

- Men performances of hegemonic masculinity include aggressiveness,  toughness, lewdness

- Within the college context, women can also reinforce hegemonic masculinity - Seeking relationships only with “strong men”

- Leaving men’s problematic practices unchallenged when they reference - alcohol usage to explain another practice (fighting, destruction of property,  rape)

>Engstrom cont.

- To understand human/social facts we have to looks at how they appear in  conversation

- What kinds of speech codes shape how people talk?

- Speech code: rules for producing culturally recognizable , appropriate speech > Engstrom’s theory

- Shifts the focus from how we can stop binge drinking on campus and asks  instead:

- “How do students, through everyday talk, collectively make sense of these  actions?”  

>How is this related to shared social space?

- Speech codes are created and recreated in particular speech communities. - Speech community--a cultural group that has shared rules of speaking and  interpretation of speech performance

- Understanding of what is normal or acceptable (i.e. the rules of drinking  culture) is learned and practiced through social interaction (i.e. talking about  drinking, and actually drinking)

>Engstrom’s Findings

- Students adhere to the cultural patterns of speaking regarding alcohol  references, which have at least four identifiable rules.

- If you are part of this particular speech community, you likely know the rules  (speech codes)

>4 Identifiable Rules  

- Rule #1: Accept references to alcohol “as is”

- Rule #2: Validations of references to alcohol  

- Rule #3: Refer to alcohol positively  

- Rule #4: Referencing alcohol should point to normalcy

>Rules in action

- Alcohol use excuses behavior that, in any other context, would be seen as  antisocial and dispreferred

- Urinating in public

- Vandalism

- Sexual misconduct  

- “But I was drunk!”

>Communicative Competence

- If you know the rules, you can participate without incident in the  communicative event  

- Engstrom did not understand the rule about not asking for specific details  (like how much someone drank)

- This marked him as communicatively incompetent in this context - It also marked him as someone who was not part of this particular speech  community (college-age students discussion drinking and drinking-related  behavior)

>Practices that reinforce hegemonic masculinity

- Men engage in more aggressive, violent, and risk-taking behavior - “That's just how they are”

- Talking about this behavior in this way and then using alcohol consumption  to excuse it only reinforces it as acceptable gender behavior  >Dominant view: students drink too much, and they often engage in  misconduct as a result

- Engstrom: this is a misrepresentation of what actually happens - In talking about alcohol consumption, students create a “natural”  relationship between excessive drinking and misconduct (“yes, I did that, but I was drunk”)

>Engstrom conclusion

- People use human/ social facts about masculinity (and femininity) to  accomplish social goals through communication (such as “being cool”) - Engstrom: not all college-age males enact (or support) the dominant type of  masculinity  

- Many college-age women enact (or support) the dominant type of  masculinity  

>Communication and social change

- Constitutive view: change the way people talk--change human/social facts-- change (social) reality

- Engstrom: change the way students talk about alcohol, they will be less likely to engage in (or support) drunken misconduct

Concepts: (review, define, explain these)

Metaphor: a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an  object or action to which it is not literally applicable.

- metaphors compare unlike things (e.g., workplace bullying) to better  understand or known entities (e.g. war, nightmare) and provide verbal  images of emotional experiences

- this compact, vivid shorthand has the power to translate meaning and  feeling into something we might more easily understand (make sense of).  - metaphors provide people with a way to express aspects both of themsleves  and of situations they may not be able to express analytically and/or literally. - metaphors that emerge in everyday talk provide a vivid way of thinking and  seeing and serves as linguistic steering devices that guide both thinking and  actions

- “He’s the angry parent and I'm the scolded child”

- how does the use of “parent and child” drive behaviors, feelings, reaction? Metaphors of workplace bullying: Tracy et al. gives examples of  metaphors used in workplace bullying  

- These examples matter because they constitute the situation - They become how the target sees the situation  

- Different metaphors give the target different options

- For example, even naming it “bullying” highlights the perpetrator’s role in  the abuse, allows to victim to recover their own sense of value

- Example: metaphors of the bullying process

- Bullying as a battle

- Target must fight for what is right

- Gives target some control, but also promotes retaliation  

- Bullying as a nightmare

- Things are unreal and don't make sense

- Target has no control

- Bullying as torture

- Target should go numb to cope with trauma  

- Undesirable effects on work performance

Framing: is selecting and highlighting some facets or issues and making  connections among them so as to promote a particular interpretation,  evaluation, and/or solution.

- Example: ‘you see this as a problem, but I see it as an opportunity’ *Framing is always from a point of view, and may be controversial - Eamples:

- abortion: “Life” v. “choice”

- afghanistan: “quagmire” v. “fighting terrorism”

- interpersonal conflict: “you started it” v. “no, YOU started it” - workplace harassment: “bullying” v. “teasing”

Intersubjectivity: when my interpretation and meaning match your  interpretation and meaning

- we share meaning is we can anticipate each other’s reactions  (intersubjectivity meaning--Pierce, founder of modern semiotic theory - I am not surprised by your behavior. Your behavior and communication make sense to me in this circumstance (social space, context)

- problems arise when we can't or don't see the same behavior, communication,event in the same way

Sense-making:  

- the process by which we give meaning to our experiences - tied to information we have access to and receive and how we interpret that information

- sensemaking in the eye of the beholder, but is also influenced by larger social systems (and contexts)

Social interaction: is the way people talk and act with each other and  various structures in society. It may include the interaction a family has  together (eating, sleeping, living together) or bureaucracies that are formed  out of the need to create order within the interaction itself. 

The constitutive view of communication: making a thing what it is,  having the power to establish something

- Comm constitutes organizations  

- Like the sender-receiver model, we often view organizations as “containers”  of comm

- The old way of thinking of this is that organization is a container and comm is its content  

- Constitutive view of comm

- Organizational comm scholars now argue that organizations are made of  communication

- Organizations only exist through comm

- Material “stuff” exists, but is given meaning by comm

- “It is in the interactive exchanges of everyday life that the systems of  organization are both realized, and its structure reinforced and perpetuated”  (Taylor, 2000).

- When we communicate, we create/recreate organizational norms

- Why does this view matter?

- Organizations are not neutral structures, they are communicatively created

- Organizations include power, resources, and strategies

Communication Problem: (fill in)

because bullying at work is experienced by 25-30% of US employees and  affects 1 in 10 workers currently, Tracy et al wants to explain how  communication is used to make-sense of the feelings experienced during the bullying (p.149)

- results:

- workplace stress

- decreased productivity

- higher medical bills

- potential lawsuits

>Engstrom’s Communication Problem

- The perception of college drinking is that the problem is the alcohol  consumption itself. Engstrom wants to explain how certain habitual ways of  speaking normalize college-age drinking and justify bad choices

- Data show that students’ patterned ways of speaking especially about  drinking, mitigate problematic student behaviors.

- Although such mitigating statements are, at times, by themselves  problematic, they (re)produce a much more troubling masculinity. Perspective – Communication and shared social space:

Metaphors help bullied individuals define the situation as an unjust one in  which bullies target victims.

PART III

Perspective: COMMUNICATION AND COMPETING INTERESTS Reading: 

Bailey, B. (2000). Communicative behavior and conflict between African American customers and Korean immigrant retailers in Los Angeles.  Discourse & Society, 11(1), 86-108. doi:10.1177/0957926500011001004 Main Ideas: (fill in)

>Bailey’s argument

B argues that the differing forms of participation documented in service  encounters --and the ways in which they are interpreted--are simultaneously  a result of:

1. Cultural and linguistic differences between storekeepers and customers in  service encounter behavior and expectations

2. Social inequality in America, which shapes both the local context in which  these encounters occur and the social assumptions that storekeepers and  customers bring to the stores  

> African Americans and Koreans in South Central LA

- Economic downturn of early 1990s leads to loss of industrial jobs, rise of  poverty in South Central

- Limited job opportunities in Korea/changing US immigration laws boast  Korean immigration in 1970s-1980s

- Koreans set up businesses in the niche left behind by African American and  Jewish retailers in South Central  

- Growing tension between African-Americans who see South Central as their  community and Koreans who see themselves as providing a service to the  community

- The administration and police force neglect rising social problems in SCLA >Focus on observable communication  

- Communicative patterns: regular ways of speaking in speech communities - Interactional style: communicative patterns typical for a speech community - Koreans and African Americans can be seen as ethnic speech communities 

>Additional context: Cultural and Linguistic differences  - Different cultural groups and their speech communities view interactions and the goals of interactions differently

- They have different expectations  

- They interpret behavior differently--based on what is valued and expected i  their own speech communities

>Social consequences  

- Korean terseness seen by African-Americans as sign of disrespect and racism (sociable engagement: sign of “respect”)

- African American’s social engagement seen by Koreans as “lack of restraint”  (“respect” only applies to interactions between adults and minors)  >The rhetoric of respect

- “Face-to-face interaction in service encounters between African-American  customers and Korean immigrant retailers often leaves members of each  group feeling insulted” (pg.89)

- “In my experience dealing with Korean merchants...the one basic problem is:  no respect. Period”.

>Interaction expectations

- Respect is important to both African-American customers and immigrant  Korean retailers

- Themes that emerged for both groups (during Bailey’s interviews) appear to  be respect and courtesy shown toward each other

- Each group felt that more respect should be accorded when communicating  together

>Perceptions of disrespect: lack of sociable involvement or lack or  public restraint

- Interviews with retailers and customers reveal a distinctive pattern of  divergent perceptions regarding behavior in stores:

- A-A customers focus complaints on the relative lack of interpersonal  engagement retailers

- Korean retailers emphasize the relative lack of restraint on the part of  customers

- Respect can be displayed through seemingly opposed types of symbolic acts >Face theory, politeness, and interactional expectations - Positive and negative face--Goffman (1971) and Face theory/politeness  theory-- Brown and Levinson(1987)

- Our positive face: reflects our desire to be accepted and liked by others  - Our negative face: reflects our wish to not be imposed upon by others - Face is always in the control of others  

- Interactants communicate (verbally and nonverbally) in ways that threaten  both types of face (often unintentionally)

- Being polite consists of attempting to save face for another - By mitigating face-threatening messages  

>Perceptions of inappropriate behavior: lack of interpersonal  engagement or lack or personal restraint

- African Americans describe how they were disrespected in immigrant Korean  stores by emphasizing perceptions of what the store-owners do not do: - Greet with a smile, maintain eye-contact

- Make small talk

- Personally engage the customer

- Korean store owners’ complaints about interactions with African American  customers focus primarily on what customers do:  

- Unsolicited small-talk

- Jokes

- Laughing and smiling  

- Speaking of relatively high volume

- Using profanity  

>From Micro → Macro

How are these differences in ethnic interactional style related to interethnic  relations?

- Two possible answers: do Koreans shopkeepers and African American  customers conduct themselves differently…

- ...because they can't help but be different (as a result of being socialized in  different groups)

- ...because they want to be different (that is because they want to signal  their different group membership)

>Why different patterns of interaction?

Why do these two groups talk differently in service encounters? - 2 possible explanations:

- Differences are the result of cultural and linguistic differences between  retailers and customers

- Differences are means for retailers and customers to highlight social  boundaries between themselves  

> Different patterns and conflict

How are ethnic discourse styles and interethnic conflict linked? - 2 possible explanations: different styles of interaction are...  - The ongoing source of interethnic tension (interethnic communication  

explanation: emphasizes difference in cultural background knowledge) - The local enactment of pre-existing tensions (socio-historical/constructivist  explanation: participants are active agents performing oppositional social  identities)  

>Interpreting patterns of interaction

Both groups:

- Publicly interpret each others’ behavior in terms of their own standards for  appropriate behavior in service encounters  

- Then assign attributions to that behavior based on expectations from their  own speech communities  

- Lack of personal engagement and forcing personal engagement--both can  labeled as rude and disrespectful

- problematic→ begins to define these interethnic relationships and affects  subsequent interactions  

>Conclusions

- Expressions of approval, solidarity, and interest can be ways of paying  respect to another person  

- As cn displays of restraint--not interfering or making undue demands on the  other

*Since both involvement and restraint can be used to display respect, the  relative lack of either can be perceived as inappropriate or insulting  - Having someone reject our need to be seen as likable and worthy is a threat  to our positive face  

- Having someone try to force us to interact according to their expectations is  a threat to our negative face

- Politeness dictates that I agree to see you as you wish to be seen and that I  do not try to engage you in ways that you do not with to engage - When I don’t do this--you perceive my behavior as impolite  

- The divergent communicative patterns displayed by immigrant Korean  storekeepers and African-American customers in LA:

- Are best explained as a result of both cultural/linguistic differences and pre existing social conflicts, AND

- Contribute to ongoing interethnic tensions, AND

- Serve as an enactment of pre existing intergroup conflicts  

- These are clear cultural bases for the relative taciturnity and restraint of  storekeepers and the relative personable involvement of customers in such  encounters

- These cultural communication patterns have value to the group enacting  them

- They create interaction expectations for both groups

- AND, these differences serve to daily inflame relations

- It is important to remember that it is not just cultural and linguistic habits  leads to these divergent patterns of interaction  

- A confluence of socio-historical conditions encourage storekeepers and  customers to highlight their differences  

- Which they do, in part, through their communicative behavior

- Large-scale social and economic inequality create a niche for these stores  and then shape their operation in ways that lead to resentment - Storekeepers and customers bring differing experiences of class and racism,  and differing assumptions about discrimination and opportunity to their  encounters with each other  

- In this society, racially, and economically charged context, intergroup  tensions and perceptions of difference are constituted and reconstituted in  everyday service encounters  

Concepts: (review, define, explain these)

Interethnic tension/conflict:  

- Korean retailer to Korean customer: tense, fast, characterized by social  restraint, lack of sociable engagement, task-oriented

- Korean retailer to African- American customer: African-American customer  engages in personable conversation, Korean resists or avoids engagement  Micro-/Macro-

- What is the link between micro-social communicative patterns and larger scale social relations between and among different speech communities? - In the Bailey article, interethnic interactions are examined through the lens  of communicative behavior in actual service encounters

- These individual interactions are then linked to larger-scale relations between groups

*SEE MORE ABOVE*

Miscommunication: Bailey: this is a central feature in African American Korean relations/service encounters  

When both communicators:

- Think they know what the other communicator is saying/doing  (misunderstanding)

- Think they know the other communicator’s motives

- Keep communicating as if they had a correct understanding of the other’s  meaning and motives

*in reality, their interpretations of meanings and motives don’t match--”lines  get crossed”  

*SEE MORE ABOVE*

Communicative patterns: Why do these two groups talk differently in  service encounters?

- 2 possible explanations:

- Differences are the result of cultural and linguistic differences between  retailers and customers

- Differences are means for retailers and customers to highlight social  boundaries between themselves  

*SEE MORE ABOVE*

Respect/restraint tension: SEE ABOVE: The rhetoric of respect, interaction expectations, perceptions of disrespect

Attributions: explanations of why people do what they do.

- often depend on the communicated patterns and concepts, such as motive. Communication Problem: (fill in)

Negative attributions ascribed from service encounters highlight “differing,  culturally specific conventions” result in “a form of interethnic/intercultural  miscommunication” and represent “a local enactment of pre-existing  conflicts”

Perspective – Communication and Competing Interests:

Miscommunication is the result of each group’s failure to reconcile ethnic,  cultural, and linguistic differences and overcome interethnic tension.

_____________________________

Reading: 

Covarrubias, P. (2002). Of endearment and other terms of address: A Mexican perspective. In Culture, communication, and cooperation: Interpersonal

relations and pronominal address in a Mexican organization (pp. xv-xxi).  Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Main Ideas: (fill in)

> Personal Address → social relations

- Prof. Hickerson (distance, hierarchy--respect)

- Dr. H (less distance, less hierarchy--friendliness, respect)

- Ruth (less distance, less hierarchy-- increased friendliness, respect) - Hey (there) (no distance, no hierarchy--no respect)

- Ruthie (childhood friends, family)

- Ru (friends from college)  

>Covarrubias: Personal address terms are…

- Culturally specific (different cultures, different vocabularies of address forms) - Deeply significant (they invoke local social systems and locate individual  persons in those systems)

- Able to give an individual person a sense of self identity, or rob them of it) - Infused with feeling (e.g. terms of endearment vs. racial slurs) - Infused with personal history (e.g. names one’s loved ones make up for  them)

> Social status  

- Senora-- marital status

- In the US:

- Mr. (male, no marital status indicated)

- Miss (unmarried woman)

- Mrs. (married woman)

- Ms. (female, no marital status indicated)

Concepts: (review, define, explain these)

Personal address:

> Personal Address → social relations

- Prof. Hickerson (distance, hierarchy--respect)

- Dr. H (less distance, less hierarchy--friendliness, respect)

- Ruth (less distance, less hierarchy-- increased friendliness, respect) - Hey (there) (no distance, no hierarchy--no respect)

- Ruthie (childhood friends, family)

- Ru (friends from college)  

>Covarrubias: Personal address terms are…

- Culturally specific (different cultures, different vocabularies of address forms) - Deeply significant (they invoke local social systems and locate individual  persons in those systems)

- Able to give an individual person a sense of self identity, or rob them of it) - Infused with feeling (e.g. terms of endearment vs. racial slurs) - Infused with personal history (e.g. names one’s loved ones make up for  them)

Identity politics: the practice and theory of influencing other people Politics= POWER (who has power over whom?)

a) A social category, defined by membership rules and (alleged) characteristic  attributes or expected behaviors, or

b) Socially distinguishing features that a person views as unchangeable but  socially consequential

- Allowed ID: an identity I claim for myself

- Ascribed ID: an identity others assign to me  

Functions of address

1. We use address terms to locate ourselves and others on a “map” of social  relations in our speech communities.

2. Address more than style: tension, activism, resistance

3. Negotiate social roles: create, maintain and transform cultural systems of  social roles

Communication Problem: (fill in)

“Symbolic pointing, in whatever its form (i.e., personal address), is forceful.  It achieves something. It is transformative. Enactments of personal address  affect profoundly and lastingly both utterer and receiver even when one  remains unaware”  

Perspective – Communication and Competing Interests:

Personal address terms are often a subject of politics: some groups refuse to  give legitimacy to another’s choice of address term and related social role

_____________________________

 Reading: 

Simonson, P. (2010). The streets of Laredo: Mercurian rhetoric and the  Obama campaign. Western Journal of Communication, 74, 94-126.  doi:10.1080/10570310903466045

Main Ideas: (fill in)

>Why be Mercurian instead of Apollo?

Mercury inspires us to bridge theory and practice:

- Observation of actual communication in context 

- Mercury crosses borders

- May invert existing beliefs and question practices

- Innovation and change in the “real world” (not just academia) >How did the Obama campaign staff do in Laredo?

Did not quite fully cross the borders of space, culture, or local networks. Simonson’s critique of the campaign’s rhetorical strategies:

- Needs to find better ways to cross cultural boundaries.

- More engagement with local culture.

- More commitment to Laredo.

- Gringos from the north were perceived as defending an unpatriotic Muslim - No visit from candidate (Obama) or a surrogate did not help   Concepts: (review, define, explain these)

Identification: the KEY to persuasion→ identification (alignment) between  speaker and listener(s)

- The ability to use language in a way that speaks to…

- Your audience’s perspective (norms, beliefs, expectations, ways of using  langauge)

- Your audience’s concerns, problems, issues, interests

*the best place to study identification is where it is nearly impossible Identification failure: Identification is the KEY to persuasion so  identification failure is persuasion failure.

Rhetoric: Rhetoric across different human communication perspectives… Engaging in rhetoric involves:

1. Crafting a message that produce identification and motivate action (taking the situation, the audience, character and passions--ethos and pathos-- into  account while speaking)

2. Through identification, building a social world in which it will make sense  for the speaker and the audience to do things together on the speaker’s  terms.

a. In Simonson: using comm. to define the situation in such a way that choosing candidate X over Y will make the best sense to the audience.  3. Promoting the interests of one group over another’s, compete for limited resources

a. In Simonson: using comm. to help candidate X become president instead of  candidate Y--there can be only one…!  

The challenge of rhetoric:

- You care about something--how do you get others to care? - You want others to do something--how can you get them to do it?  Hauser’s four-part definition:

Rhetoric is...

1. Occasional discourse (a response to a situation that seems significant to  speaker and audience)

2. Addressed to an audience (of 1+ persons)

3. Practical discourse (designed to address the significant situation in a way  that makes sense to the audience)

4. A mode of thinking and speaking suited to inducing and coordinating social  action (gets the audience to act in a way that will constitute proper response  to the situation)  

Mercurian rhetoric: studying-by-doing, inside/outside the structure of the  university

- Expertise lies with experience; academic not automatically an unquestioned  expert

- Meaning and rhetorical success are revealed in the experience - Texts are interpreted

- Simonson positions Obama as Mercurian

Apollonian rhetoric: held in place by institutions, firmly rooted in place,  unquestioned expertise

- Expertise based on existing knowledge and social habits

- Meaning exists and is waiting to be discovered through expert and scholarly  analysis of texts

- Simonson positions Hillary Clinton as Apollonian  

Communication Problem: (fill in)

Doing “rhetoric work” for the Obama campaign in 2008 demonstrates the  difficulty a “gringo bearing words” has in cultivating “lines of identification  among South Texas” Latino voters  

Perspective -- Communication and competing interests:

Rhetoric involves promoting the interests of one group over another in  competition for limited resources; achieved by building identifications and  accounting for difference.

______________________________________________________________________________  PART IV

Combining Perspectives: SUMMARIZING PREVIOUS CONTENT AND  CONTEXT

Readings: 

Bussel, R. K. (2008). Beyond yes or no: Consent and sexual process. In J.  Friedman, & J. Valenti (Eds.), Yes means yes! Visions of female sexual power  and a world without rape (pp. 43-52). Berkeley, CA: Seal Press.

AND

Harris, K. L. (2010). Peanut butter sandwiches: Making sense of acquaintance rape in ongoing relationships. In D. O. Braithwaite, & J. T. Wood (Eds.), Casing interpersonal communication: Case studies in personal and social  relationships (pp. 181-185). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.

Main Ideas: (fill in)

> “non-consensual sex” (Harris) and rape can have terrible  consequences

> How do we negotiate consent? → Communication is a KEY aspect > Sex is one of the best things in life

BUT, not everyone wants to have sex with everyone else all the time → need for norms surrounding “consensual sex”

→ need to hold those accountable who do not seek consent

> Communication as messaging Perspective

From this perspective:

- Consent is a matter of sending effective messages to get an unambiguous  “yes” (a clear “yes”)

- Rape victims need to design effective messages that convince others that  rape has occurred

...but it's not that simple…

- The effectiveness of messages about rape prevention requires consensus  about norms and rules related to “sex”, “consent”, “rapist”/ “victim”, the  “right” response to “rape”

> Communication and Shared Social Space

From this perspective:

- Consent should be a matter of negotiation, and not just of sending a  message that gets the desired response

- Defining a situation as rape should emerge from interaction among the  victim and/or the perpetrator and/or relevant third parties (police, courts) > Brussel: seeking consent can be turned into a (fun!) negotiation of terms  of intimacy

- “What can we do together for the sake of closeness/pleasure? - The process of negotiation can help partners overcome uncertainty  - It also complements legal measures against rape

- Each new level of sexual activity requires consent

Brussel: never give up on seeking clarity, certainty!

ALL of which requires Communication (and an understanding of what we are  and are not comfortable talking about)

>Communication and competing interests

From this perspective  

- Concerns with consent and rape highlight gender relations and the history of  those relations

- Fact: calling “it” rape prompts women to seek help following non-consensual  sex

Anti-rape advocates are concerned with re-labeling practices  - “non-consensual sex” is to be labeled as rape

- To empower women to make sense of and share their experience

- To counter rape culture (e.g., blaming female victims)

>Words and meaning are complicated

Rape calls for specific performance:

- I can’t be friends with a rapist

- Positions perpetrator in exclusively bad terms

- Expectation of legal action by the victim  

- Paints an image of female victims as having no control over, r responsibility  for, what happened

- Leaves no grat area between “rape” and “not rape”

- Fails to acknowledge varied types of harm

- Did not match clearest cultural images of “rape”

- Term reduces the complexity of the livs experience  

- Not having another word made it even more difficult to talk about  Concepts: (review, define, explain these)

· Cultural and social  

rules/norms: what is  

expected/seen as  

“normal” behavior  

· ambiguity

· consent: a matter  

of…

- Trying to send effective  

messages (against all  

odds)

- Social interaction and the  

construction of social  

realities (against all odds)

- (gender) polictics and  

inequity

· social contract: a social group of any size observes a set of norms,  rules, and expectations regarding appropriate conduct

- A norm (principle): “in a romantic situation, if you want to pursue a physical  relationship with another person you should not force her/him to have such a relationship”

- A rule (follows from rule): “if the other says no, stop”

- An expectation (expected behavior based on the rule): “sex requires consent. Rape requires legal action”.  

*the social contract is invoked when group members want to hold someone  accountable for inappropriate conduct.

* holding someone accountable when the norms/rules/expectations are  uncertain or ambiguous id difficult

· rape statistics

- 1 in 4 (25%) of female college students will have been raped by the time  they graduate

· rape myths:

“Most victims are raped by strangers” → in reality, most rapes are from an  acquaintance

“You can’t be raped by your significant other” → can be raped by anyone at  anytime  

· rape misconceptions:

Same as above

· acquaintance rape: the most common type of rape...also the most  complicated type of rape

Communication Problem: (fill in)

In the case of highly complex issues (like rape) there are no easy solutions - Ambiguity about what constitutes consent can result in sexual assault - Clarity, and shared sense-making, is not always possible  

Perspective -- Communication and sending messages:

Ambiguity (consent) is addressed with the sending and receiving of effective  messages.

Perspective – Communication and shared social space:

Ambiguity (consent) is dependent upon the coordinated communication of  the interlocutors. Consent and sense-making takes two (or more).

Perspective – Communication and competing interests:

Different stakeholders (men, women, law enforcement, etc.) have different  understandings of (and interests related to) consent, sexual assault

Page Expired
5off
It looks like your free minutes have expired! Lucky for you we have all the content you need, just sign up here