week 16, post #2

The most interesting concept that I found throughout the course of the semester if that of group dynamics. I think the social integration to the group is extremely interesting and fragile process. Whether it is in a large group or small group, I think the size is also important. A small group should experience greater socializing factors, than a large group. In a large group there is an aspect of anonymity, of which someone would not be as integrated into a group. Communication wise, if you are not fully integrated into a group, than your communication will be reduced as well. Think about how much you would communicate with your friends, as compared with a large group in a classroom. You would communicate more with your friends than the other group of which you are affiliated.

week 16, post #1

Which of the research methods listed in Table 11.3 seem the most interesting? Assume you want to study some aspect of deception. Frame a research question. Which method would you choose to answer the question? Why?

I am a psychology major, and the scientific method is very important to me. The most important characteristic of scholarly research for me is being methodological. Having a solid method to research will assist in reducing confounds, which may lead to false or unsupported conclusions. Methods are also the area in which the most issues may occur and the research can go wrong. Methods must focus on the question the researchers wish to answer, and not solve every question in the world at that time. This is often where research goes in the wrong direction, and the research is unsuccessful.

week 13, post 3

Do you agree with Marshall McLuhan that the medium is the message, i.e. that the format or logic of a medium is as important as its content and, in fact, determines what content will be broadcast through that channel? Evaluate his idea that television is a cool medium.

I do find the point of the medium is the message very interesting, however I do not agree with Marshall McLuhan's assessment. My question that I do not have answered would be what if the message was meaningless? If it was just a picture on a screen, but it was being broadcasted to thousands or millions, isn't it still just a picture on a screen? The message medium and its contents are needed jointly to represent the correct information that is needed to be represented. Television is absolutely a cool medium because it mirrors real life. It is as close to real life as possible.

week 13, post #2

The function of the media were expanded upon by sociologist Charles Wright. They include surveillance, correlation, cultural transmission, and entertainment. Surveillance includes the actions of gathering and disseminating information. Correlation is the analysis and evaluation of information. Cultural transmission is the education and socialization of receivers. And finally, entertainment is the presentaiton of escapist material that provided enjoyment and gratification. Currently, I believe most of the population rely on media equally for all 4 functions, whether is a comdedy show, news coverage, or educational programs. This process leads to prosocial learning as well, which is the reinforcement of social ideals and passing on cultural norms.

week 13 post no 1

1) Have you made friendships that exclusively in cyberspace? If so, how are they different from f2f relationships? If you have not formed cyberspace relationships, why not?

I have never engaged in friendships that are exclusively in cyberspace. I have engaged in social networking through sites like myspace and facebook, but I have met, in person, all of my contacts in the two social networks. I feel there needs to be some sort of reliability and validity to a person, and the anonymity is a major freedom that threats someones reliability and validity. If you’ve never met someone in person, that what would be your major source of entertainment or enjoyment with this person, anyway. It simply doesn’t make sense to ignore the 1,000 or more people in close proximity to you, and who undoubtedly would have to share some sort of interest.

week 12, post 3

3. Sexual harassment in the workplace is a very pressing issue in today’s times. The inequality of the male and female genders and the chasing nature of male to females has created a dangerous situation in the workplace. The pursuing of a co-worker that is not interested can easily be considered sexual harassment with attempts at different displays of affection and intimacy. Sexual harassment is unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and conduct of sexual nature. The laws of the workplace are now designed to prevent the actions from taking place by the harshness of the consequences. In my organizational history, I have not worked in organizations, which are more likely to promote sexual harassment, and would be uncomfortable in such an organization.

week 12, post 2

2. Review the etiquette rules suggested in the text. Respond to each one. Have you ever been bothered by cell phone, answering machines, or beepers? What do you feel about call waiting? Is it rude to put people on hold to take another call?

I definitely think that we must be able to understand the diversity of people within the organization, and be able to respect one another. Personal business always seems to surface in the professional world, so it something that simply must be endured.

I have been bothered by cell phone use, especially in my current job. When guests are checking into the hotel I work at, and the person is on the phone, I believe it is extremely rude. I may have other guests wanting to checkin as well as the guest, and this person is still on the phone.

From my experience in a heavy call volume position, it is not rude to place a call on hold a assist another person. You need to be able to multitask and help both at once, with researching while speaking to the new person.

Week 12, post #1

1. How are organizations tied to the environment? What is the relationship between the school you attend and the city or town in which it is situated? What, if any, ethical obligations do an organization like a college or university has to the local community?

Organizations are really their own environments. I especially like how the book paralleled the two, and expressed the need to create a health environment, and that one can also be destroyed. I think the town or city’s “attitude” is often reflected in the school. The main relationship is the diversity across many different lines. I think a college or university must have the same type of responsibilities of other corporations, especially local corporations. This corporate responsibility must create a good will with the people to create a positive working environment between the two. The school needs students, and the students need a place for an educational experience.

week 11, post #3

Managing Interpersonal Conflict

In relationships, conflict cannot be avoided, but it can be managed properly. Unaddressed conflict can undermine relationships and lead to relational dissolution. The three main issues which do not solve interpersonal conflict are withdrawing, forcing, and accommodation. Withdrawing involves walking away or changing the subject when they sense conflict. Forcing is the process of disregarding the other partner’s needs in an effort to get what they want by any means necessary. Accommodation is the process of giving in immediately when they sense conflict. Some issues that the couple should strive for is compromise and problem solving. With these two concepts, a couple should be able to work through any conflict, without keeping thought of anger and despair.

week 11, post 2

*Think about the filters you use to eliminate people from consideration as potential romantic partners. What characteristics or behaviors lead you to judge others as unattractive? Does Duck's theory make sense to you? Have you ever eliminated someone by using a sociological or pre-interaction cue only to reconsider them based on interaction and cognitive cues?

Filters are extremely important in picking potential romantic partners. Without having filters it would require a sensory overload, as too much information would need to be analyzed. I judge attractiveness mainly based on facial features. At that point, I would then gauge their personality and ability to participate in a relationship. Duck’s model makes sense as it is based on phases. The four phases are intrapsychic, dyadic, social and grave-dressing. I believe the heart of all break-ups is some unresolved conflict, involving any of a multitude of issues that every couple faces. I have made quick judgements of someone, and then reconsidered them based on interaction. It was difficult for that person to move past the bias in my mind.

patterns of Interpersonal communication

Which pattern (rigid complimentary, competitive symmetry, or submissive symmetry) do you think would be the most difficult to change? Why? Which would be the most damaging to a relationship? Which would be the most potentially damaging to the self-esteem of the individuals involved?

The rigid complimentary pattern is when the submissive partner begins to resent always giving in or when the dominant partner begins to tire of being in charge, causing dissatisfaction. Competitive symmetry is when both partners fight for the one-up position. The submissive symmetry is when both parties struggle to relinquish control.

I would argue that the pattern that is most difficult to change is the submissive symmetry pattern. This is simply because of the desire associated with change. In the other pattern, one or both partners are attempting to change, although the other partner may be resisting the change. In the submissive symmetry pattern, both partners are resisting taking control, and do not want a change in their position of power in the relationship.

The most damaging pattern to a relationship would be the competitive symmetry pattern. This is because both partners are fighting for control, and no end is in sight. They both will escalate the competitive nature in hopes of turning the relationship, but instead are damaging it. The rigid complimentary pattern is the most damaging to self-esteem, because it could cause a long last self-defeating situation. In which the person constantly wants to prove that the other person is rude and controls the relationship, and will not take control to prove they are right. The same can be said about the reciprocal, in which the person always in control will make the decision, expecting the other to not make the decision.

Week 9, post 2

Do you believe in the rationality, perfectibility, and mutabililty premises? What social institutions and practices are based on these beliefs?

Unfortunately, I believe that rationality, perfectibility and mutuability are not realistically attainable, however should be the goals of our society. We should make only rational decision. We should lead perfect lives. We should have mutual respect in our relationships. Our countries laws and judicial system is based on rationality. Our local governments, and each of our individual choices are based on perfectibility. We all don't want to make a decision or actions which are negative. And finally mutability is actually beginning to be a much larger portion of our society. Before, when a person was arrested, it was simply about serving the jail time, and that was it, no we focus on rehabilitation as well, to improve their pyschological situation.

week#9, post#1

I somewhat agree with Ruth Benedict regarding the impact of culture unto the development of the individual. I have a more individualist approach, in which the development of the self, is that of an interaction between the predisposition, or genetic makeup, and the environment, or cultural aspects. One of the greatest examples of this is the development of alcoholism. Life can be extremely tough, as well as depressing, and most individuals experience similar circumstances or events. However, not all become alcoholic drinkers. This means that the environment is shared between all individuals, yet all individuals do not end up the same. It is the interactions between the genetic predisposition, and the stressor, cultural events, which shape us. Only prevention education to improve coping methods of individuals engaged in events, would allow an individual to break through the limit of their culture.

Week #7, post #2

Although nonverbal messages are more universal than verbal messages, nonverbals do not always carry the same meanings in other cultures. Can you give examples of some of the nonverbal displays that take on different meanings in other countries? If you have moved around within this country have you ever encountered regional differences in nonverbal meaning?

Derogatory gestures easily come to mind when thinking of nonverbal, and sometimes even verbal communication miscommunications. I think that insults are largely dependent on culture, as they are usually not universal. From my work at a hotel, I remember a time when I witnessed a business introduction between a Japanese businessman and an American businessman. The Japanese gentleman bowed to the American, and the American did not bow back. The Japanese gentlemen seemed very taken back by the events, and actually walked away from the American. The American was taken back by the whole event, and thought it was the Japanese gentleman’s fault that the meeting did not happen.

Week 7, post 1

1. Because nonverbal messages can be ambiguous, they are open to a misinterpretation. Have you ever been wrong about the meaning of someone’s nonverbal message? Describe what happened. How can people increase the accuracy with which they interpret nonverbal messages.

I have been wrong a few times when dealing with nonverbal communication messages, one of which is very vivid in my mind. I was working at my hotel, at the front desk, and gentleman came up to the front desk and asked for a bottle of wine. I let him know that we have room service, and he could order it in his room. He said he wanted me to order for him, so I gave him a list and he point to one, and I asked him if he wanted a glass or a bottle, and he clinched his fist and nodded at me. And then I let him know the price, and he repeated the action. I assumed the clinched fisted symbolized holding a bottle, and I quoted that price. I found out he only wanted a glass of wine.

Week #6, Post#3 - Understanding Conversation

Converstation means something more to me, than the average person. I work at a large hotel, and in my position, must make conversation with our guests everyday. In a single month, we register almost 7,000 guests, so I probably individual speak to about 1,000 complete strangers. The conversation for me, is often based on gauging who and what that person represents in my 3 minutes or so that I conversate with that person. I obviously don't often know if my judgement regarding the person was true to his or her life, and did not use the judgement in any way. I found that most guest do seemingly fit into a mold, and that was dictated by the conversation piece we spoke of, how excited/shy the person seemed, nonverbal cues, such as staying on a cell phone during check-in, and a slew of other communication factors. It was very interesting to see the impact of such literature, to make me think back to my real world experience.

Men/Women

I believe that men and women do use communication in different ways. I think that men often use nonverbal communication much more than women. This can easily be seen in handshakes and head nods for acknowledgment, which would mostly be a conversation action for women. Men often talk less, but are more focused in their speech, almost to a fault, such as appearing not to care. Women speak from a more global perspective, which sometimes can lead to speech that is not connected to the original topic, bu may be just as important. There can be obvious differences and discrepancies between and within genders based on personality as well. We might assume that speech can be associated with the level of masculinity or feminity displayed in the individual.

Week 6 - Judgements

1). Is it possible to perceive others without in some way judging or categorizing them? If so, how? If not, how can we make the judgments we do make more fair?

I believe it is not possible to perceive others without judging them in some way. The brain naturally categrorizes people just the same as any other object present in our world. This is an energy preservation adaptation, which allows us to go about our lives without a sensory overload. However, this narrowing of attention to only experiences and objects that our unclassified from previous experience can someimes be a shortcomming. The brain will categorize objects, persons, etc., as the same, however, they may only appear to be the same. What we must do in our judgements, is to take the sum of the past experiences, some positive and some negative, to have an overall impression, which hopefully should be neutral. The more experiences that a person would have, should lead to a better approximation of judgements.

Week #4 - Post #2

Q2:

One speaker in my experience that has greatly motivated me was my one of my first managers at work. To this day, his words seem to have a profound impact on my behavior and thoughts regarding subjects. I have always valued his opinion. I transferred to his department after he spoke to me and thought I would fit in well. I worked with him for two years, and whenever I would make a mistake, he would know the words to properly motivate me. Now he moved on to another position, and I have taken his position. His words still affect my behavior and thoughts just as before, I recently took over more responsibilities at work, but did not ask for an increase in pay. He advised me of my poor decision, and I recently asked for the raise.

Some of the worst speakers I have heard are unfortunately, some teachers. These teachers are not the ones who are engaging, and wish all their students to learn something from every lesson. These are the teachers who are simply earning a paycheck, and will not do one more iota of effort than the minimum requirement. Unfortunately, at my public high school, I believe we had a few of these.

week #4 - post#1

A well-known speaker I would like to analyze would be presidential canditate Obama. Obama has very unique credibility towards his listening audience. Obama's greatest strength is that of the unknown. He is opposite of the polital forces which have been in power for the past 8 years. This gives him the ability to say, "If you don't like the current state of affairs in our country, then elect me, because I am opposite the current power." This is a very strong and appealing statement to most voters. Obama doesn't have as much power as John McCain, or credibility is some area with relation to foreign policy experience, however his attractiveness is far greater than McCain with his ability to sway the nation.

Week #3 - Post #3

I think the systematic approach introduced in the chapter is extremely worthwhile. It is so interesting to see the balance and play between each element which is present. As a psychology major, I have learned quite a lot about confounds, and how they can affect the results of an experiment. The situation, goals, and instruments, all have their individual aspects, and can affect one another as well. The systematic approach takes that into consideration, and that is why I find it one of the most appealing approaches in communications. The other approaches seem a bit loose, and not very scientific or objective.

pragmatic perspective

From the pragmatic perspective, it does make sense to think of communication as patterned interaction, however there is one issue, which offers discrepant information. Communication obviously builds of itself, and the information presented by others. The pragmatic perspective is very scientific in its critical approach. This would give support for the view at which communication is considered patterned interaction, however, one major issue is that of chance. The pragmatic perspective recognizes that luck, and chance can always influence events. Similar to the issues regarding chance, communication is like a game, which inches, positions, etc., can be the difference between success and failure. And again, communication builds off itself. Communication, however, is an everlasting interaction, and a game is not.

Goodness, truth, and Public speaking

A question of morals is important to debating good orators. I believe that you do not have to be morally good to be a good orator. Someone may lie, cheat, and steal, but still be able to convince you to do an action based on ethos, pathos, and logos. It is up to the audience to have a critical mind in their interpretation of the information which is presented to them. The connection between goodness, truth, and public communication, is the intent which started the process. The orator may have wanted to “help the world,” however found that their message would not be heard if they did not break some of their moral righteousness.

Pathos

I think of the priest at St. Joseph's Church in Downtown San Jose, as being a speaker that I admire. He does qualify in the pathos qualification by Aristotle. He appeals to the entire church to believe in something they cannot physically feel, touch, see, or smell. Yet with this is able to get the whole group back every Sunday to listen to him, and believe in what he is saying. I personally use a logos mode of persuasion, as I tend to believe in more logical things myself, thus would identify myself accordingly. For example, if I am trying to persuade one of my employees to work a graveyard shift, I would emphasize the increase in pay, decrease in work, and downplay the fact that they would have to stay awake all night, and there is no manager on duty.

-Daron

test

test