Has Communication Technology Made People Less Effective Communicators - Essay Example

Has communication technology made people less effective communicators? Name: Course: Institution: Date: Instructor: Has communication technology made people less effective communicators? The rapid advances in technology over the past few decades have significantly transformed how people communicate. Advances in technology have enabled human beings to communicate across an increasing number of platforms and geographical boundaries (Markus 2004; Kossen et al 2013). In particular, the internet has provided people to expand their social networks and form closer interpersonal relationships. However, research into the impact of communication technology on society has raised questions over the effect of personal communication technologies on individuals and societies. This research has been informed by claims that communication technologies have directly affected communication in both positive and negative ways (Markus 2004). In particular, an increasing body of research has suggested that despite all benefits of electronic communication, it holds risks for social life. This essay will evaluate this claim by examining whether communication technology has made people less effective communicators. The essay will first provide a brief background of advances in communication technology specifically focusing on personal communication technologies. The essay will briefly outline the benefits and risks posed by communication technologies on communication. In light of a working definition of what constitutes effective communication, the essay will evaluate the claim that communication technology has made people less effective communicators. Communication technologies have significantly transformed how people communicate. A series of successive and incremental technological breakthroughs from the telegraph to the telephone, radio, television and most recently the internet have enabled human beings to increasingly break the barriers of space and time and interact with each other instantaneously. Most business communication is now done via e-mails, texts, instant messaging, intranets, blogs, websites and other technology-enabled media (Tardanico 2012). Enabled by increasingly sophisticated communication devices with a range of communication capabilities more and more people are increasingly turning to the internet to communicate with their friends and family across social and geographical boundaries (Bargh & McKenna 2004). Instant messaging and social media is increasingly preferred as the means of communication for a growing segment of the global population. As a result, the use of electronic communication has far surpassed face-to-face and voice-to-voice communication (Tardanico 2012). Effective communication has been defined from the perspective of interpersonal communication competence. An effective communicator is able to achieve the goals they have for specific interactions. To be able to achieve these goals, the required qualities of the communication are that it should be clear, concise and precise (Solomon & Theiss 2013). The more effective a person is in communicating, the more likely they are to achieve the goals intended by communication. Closely related to effectiveness is appropriateness. An effective communicator should also be able to use language that is adapted to particular situations and people. Effective communication is not limited to verbal or written communication but also includes non verbal communication. Tardanico (2012) cites studies that show an overwhelming 93% of communication is based on nonverbal body language. To become an effective communicator, a person must develop a range of communication skills, adapt communication appropriately according to the situation, engage in a dual perspective, monitor communication and commit to effective and ethical communication (Solomon & Theiss 2013). The benefits of communication technology on communication have been well documented. Markus (1994) identifies several capabilities offered by electronic communication not possible through face to face communication. These include asynchrony or temporal separation between sending and receiving, externally recorded memory and computer-processable memory. These capabilities have the potential to improve communication by allowing more time to process understand communication and provide feedback which is normally not possible in face to face communication where feedback is often required immediately. In addition, computer or device memory helps eliminate obstacles to communication such as noise, interruption or poor memory (Markus 2004; Katz 2003). New communication technologies have also reduced the social isolation of geographically dispersed people who have little opportunity for face-to-face meetings. They sustain group-like interactions among people with common interests and concerns. Communication technologies also have the potential to facilitate increased sociability in the workplace through transmission of the social emotional communication believed to be necessary to the maintenance of organizational tasks (Markus 2004; Fielding 2006). One of the areas which communication technologies have positively affected communication is written communication. Electronic communication has greatly improved communication between organizations and businesses as requisitions, quotations, emails and other requests can easily and efficiently be made through email (Fielding 2006; Kossen et al 2013). With regards to interpersonal communications, not only have these technologies enabled people to expand their social networks by transcending the barriers of time and space but they have the capacity to make communication more effective. As an example, family and friends can now communicate across long distances instantaneously by transmitting voice and data in the form of text, pictures or videos. Recent advances such as video calling and chatting (Skype) have further enabled people to interact virtually. It can be argued that these technologies are more efficient forms of communication as they have significantly lowered the cost of communicating as compared to older forms of communication such as letters, telegraphs and long distance telephone calls (Kossen et al 2013). It can also be argued that these technologies have made people more effective communicators as they have provided an expanding scope of opportunities for continuous feedback by enabling people to monitor communication which is a vital component of effective communication. Through social media networks such as Facebook and Twitter, people can instantaneously interact with millions across the world and receive feedback in real time. Similarly, there is an ever increasing variety of options for family, friends and other social networks to interact privately and intimately regardless of geographical constraints (Tardanico 2012; Solomon & Theiss 2013). However, despite the potential benefits, there are several features and aspects of communication technologies which have had negative effects on the effectiveness of communication. As indicated by Markus (1994) and Tardanico (2012), communication technologies pose certain risks to social life and real communication. Some of the deficiencies of electronic media include filtering out certain political, social and behavioral cues used to maintain interpersonal relationships and regulate face to face interaction. As a result, such communication is rendered “impersonal” and lacking in sociability. While using these technologies as avatars, users can project the image they wish which may be different from actual reality (Tardanico 2012). Without the benefit of nonverbal clues offered by face-to-face communication, the audience is more vulnerable to misinterpretation of messages. Given that 93 % of the message communicated is nonverbal, the faceless environment of social media can mean that the quality of social interaction declines (Solomon & Theiss 2013). The anonymity presented by the internet can easily contribute to misunderstanding and inaccurate assumptions which can lead to conflict. Other researchers have concluded that heavy use of electronic media “depersonalizes” communication and might create social isolation by distancing users from relationships external to the medium. A case in point is failure to communicate to persons who are offline. Unlike electronic media, face-to-face and voice communication plays an important role in clearing up assumptions, checking communications for accuracy, seeking out opportunities for human engagement and fostering two-way communication (Tardanico 2012). In considering whether communication technologies have made people less effective communicators or not, several factors need to be taken into consideration. The medium of communication, the nature of the relationship between the participants and the context in which the communication occurs are all important considerations in effective communication (Tardanico 2012; Solomon & Theiss 2013). There are several options available to compensate for the limitations of communication technologies. As an example, in the workplace, taking time to engage face to face with colleagues helps clear misunderstandings. The contextual limitations posed by communication technologies can be ameliorated by seeking individuals’ preferred processes of interaction. In addition, fostering feedback in communication also helps build closer relationships (Tardanico 2012). In conclusion, communication technologies have significantly altered how people communicate. Research has shown that these technologies can provide opportunities to increase the effectiveness of communication while simultaneously imposing constraints on the ability to communicate effectively. Communication technologies present unique capabilities not possible in face to face communication such as the ability to connect geographically displaced communities and the improvements to written communication which present opportunities to make communication more effective. However, overreliance on communication technologies has also been criticized for its tendency to “depersonalize” communication by obfuscating the nonverbal social, personal and behavioral cues critical to the maintenance of interpersonal relationships and the regulation of interpersonal communication. Ultimately, whether communication has made people less effective communicators or not is determined by contextual factors such as the medium of communication, the context in which the communication occurs and the nature of the relationship between the participants. References Bargh, J.A., & McKenna, K.Y.A. (2004).The Internet and Social Life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573-590. Fielding, M. (2006). Effective Communication in Organisations. Cape Town: Juta & Company Ltd. Katz, J.E. (2003). Machines That Become Us: The Social Context of Personal Communication Technology. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Kossen, C., Kiernan, E., & Lawrence, J. (2013).Communicating for success. Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education. Markus, M.L. (2004). Finding a Happy Medium: Explaining the Negative Effects of Electronic. Communication on Social Life at Work. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2): 199-149. Solomon, D. & Theiss, J. (2013). Interpersonal Communication: Putting Theory into Practice. New York: Routledge. Tardanico, S. (2012, April 30). Is Social Media Sabotaging Real Communication? ForbesWoman. Retrieved on May 30, 2014 from http://www.forbes.com/sites/susantardanico/2012/04/30/is-social-media-sabotaging- real-communication/. Read More