How Self-Concept, Perception, and Emotion Impact Interpersonal Communication - Case Study Example

How self-concept, perception, and emotion impact interpersonal communication? Introduction Misunderstanding and conflicts have been said to be results of miscommunication. Interpersonal communication, when used properly, however could lead to good relationships and better understanding among individuals. To be able to make good use of interpersonal communication, it is useful to know and have a little understanding of the interpersonal communication and other related theories. With knowledge and understanding, a person would be able to know how to manipulate circumstances in order to achieve certain desired outcomes. This paper aims to provide a brief overview of the theories that are relevant in interpersonal communication, analyze how these theories are relevant in producing effective interpersonal communication, and how interpersonal communication as a process can be manipulated to produce better communication outcomes. Definition of Concepts Interpersonal communication is the process of interacting between two different individuals, which can be done either face-to-face or through other forms of mediation. It can be studied in four different perspectives: relational or qualitative; situational or contextual; quantitative; and functional or strategic. In the relational perspective, interpersonal communication is seen as a shared process between the sender and the receiver. There is simultaneous interaction between the sender and the receiver, with the aim of creating meaning. In the situational or contextual perspective, interpersonal communication is viewed as part of the specific context to which the sender and the receiver belong. The quantitative perspective is unique from the other perspectives in that it also encompasses not only dyadic interactions as is but also impersonal communication. Functional or strategic perspective emphasizes interpersonal communication as a process to achieve a certain purpose, particularly, to achieve interpersonal goals (Honors, 2001). Interpersonal communication has four basic elements: the sender—the person from whom the message comes from; the message—the information being sent by the sender to the receiver; the receiver—the person to whom the message is being sent to from the sender; and the feedback or the response of the receiver to the message sent by the sender. Self-concept is sometimes deemed synonymous to the concept, self-identity. It is the conceptual understanding, belief, and regard about the self (Self-concept, 2001). Perception is the process of acquisition, interpretation, selection and organization of information as provided by senses (Theories of Perception in Psychology, n.d.). Emotion is a complex concept that refers to the mental state that provokes a physiological response, positive or negative (Emotion, 2003). It is differentiated from feeling in that emotions are physiological responses and does not arise from any conscious effort. Related Theories Theories on Interpersonal Communication Theories on Interpersonal Communication usually focus on their complications and its contextual basis. There are some theories, for example that specially acknowledge the complexity of interpersonal communication by noting that there are not just one nor two people involved in interpersonal communication, but six. These are: the person you think you are; the person you think the other person is; the person you think the other person thinks you are; the person that the other person thinks he is; the person that the other person thinks you are; and the person that the other person thinks you think he or she is. In addition, interpersonal communication is seen as symbolic in nature. That is, the sender and the receiver do not actually communicate ideas but symbols of these ideas (King, 2000). Theories on Self-concept There are four main theories that aim to explain “self-concept.” Most prominent among which is the pragmatic theory which sees the self-concept as a dynamic and complex process of becoming aware of one’s individuality. William James and George Herbert Mead are among the pragmatists who stand out in this theory (Doyle, 2005). Based on the theory of dramatism and self-presentation, self-concept is the role that we have constructed in our everyday lives and how we shape our image based on this role as we choose to make the people, and ourselves believe it (Doyle, 2005). The Humanistic theory emphasizes that it is our personal goals that actually shape or self-concept and that individual growth is a path towards self-actualization (Doyle, 2005). The postmodern theory views the self as a product of relations and negotiations encountered in communities (Doyle, 2005a). Theories on Perception Among the theories of perception, people develop the concept of naïve realism first. Naïve realism is the theory of perception in which people perceive things in themselves. People who hold on to this theory regard what they perceive to be the world and not some form or representation of the “real world” (Theories of Perception in Psychology, n.d.). In relation to naïve realism is direct realism which connects the perceived world in the mind to the external representation in the real world. Direct realism acknowledges the existence of a world outside that in the mind. It assumes that an object’s representation is a part of the physical object it represents (Theories of Perception in Psychology, 2006). Unlike Direct realism, Indirect realism supposes that an object and its representation is a brain activity. Indirect realism supposes that objects are perceived only if there are data in the brain that recognizes the object of perception. In other words, external perception of objects becomes possible only by being aware of the representations of these objects. While direct realism dismisses experiences such as dreams, imaginations and illusions, these are consistent and possible with indirect realism (Theories of Perception in Psychology, n.d.). The previous theories on perception are classified as realist theories. Anti-realist theories include Idealism and Skepticism. Idealists perceive reality as something achievable. On the opposite, skeptics perceive reality as something beyond what can be achieved by the mind (Theories of Perception in Psychology, n.d.). Theories on Emotion The James-Lange theory supposes that emotions happen as a result of some psychological and physiological responses to the situation. A variation of this theory was provided by Walter Cannon and Phillip Bard. Based on their theory, information from the senses goes to two different pathways: one, to the cortex which processes the subjective experience and the other, to the hypothalamus which starts the associated physiological processes. This is the Cannon-Bard theory. In other words, emotion and physiological response do not occur simultaneously or one as a result of another but together (Boeree, 2002). Integration They symbolic nature of communication allows only more probability of misunderstanding between the sender and the receiver. The words and how the words are structured, merely functioning as representations of the idea to be conveyed, means that a special understanding is required between the sender and the receiver to prevent miscommunication. This means that the perfect communication could only be achieved if the people involved in the communication process have the same perception of the self, the other and the things surrounding them, and the same subjective responses as well. Now, take note of one certain insance: A young scientist is about to give a presentation that could make or break his career, to a panel of world-renowned scientists in his field. That there are six people involved in the communication process and not only two means that there is not only the “I” and the “other” that has to be considered in interpersonal communication. The involvement of the six personas and their identities’ per se requires full consideration of the perceptions of oneself and the other, which, although may not always be real or true, could significantly affect how interpersonal communication goes. How one perceives the self (the self-concept) and the other, and how one thinks he or she is perceived by the other can greatly affect the types of words and word structure used (and thus, symbols); and could change how a person would act at a certain situation. Going back to the scientist, it is learned that the scientist actually hold the members of the panel with such veneration as close to deities, and thinks that he is too lowly to stand in front of such scientists. With those factors to consider, the scientist may act either to impress or with shivers and bowed head during the presentation. There is a high probability of him being misjudged and his message being misinterpreted. As it is known in communication, how a message is presented could greatly affect how the message is perceived. Put the scientist in a different context, say, if he is about to present to a group of friends or classmates for no other purpose than to provide them with information about his current endeavors and not his career at steak, the scientist would probably act in a different manner—that is, the scientist would be more relaxed, with no bowed head and no need to impress. There would be a higher probability of the message coming across, not only because of the scientist’s more relaxed demeanor but also because of the natural similarities in perceptions and emotional range. Still, even with the same audiences, the scientist’s actions would be different if he deems himself highly whether against the scientists or his friends; and if he thinks that his friends thinks highly of him. He would then shape himself during the presentation based on this image set by him upon himself and how he thinks he is seen by his audience. In such case, the scientist would be presenting for no other purpose than to impress because his presentation, even before actually presenting it is already deemed a success by himself. Any assault or comment against his presentation or theory would be considered a threat to his self-concept and would simply either be dismissed or accepted in distorted forms, allowing less room for growth or change. The scientist could also act negatively, triggering a subjective response. In this case, the subjective response could lead to anger which could make the scientist mistake the comment as a personal attack. Even though the audience was able to present a message, this message is intercepted by the emotion, distorting perception and hindering reception. In other words the message of the comment would not come across and would result to an inappropriate feedback. Improving Interpersonal Communication The aim of communication is to gain better understanding of messages being conveyed. It is only by understanding the theories affecting interpersonal communication that effective communication, although cannot be ensured, can be made more probable. Even in emotionally-charged situations like when the scientist felt a personal attack during his presentation, communication could still be possible if the audience, in return would listen to the scientist respectfully and understand the possibility of him failing to see the significance of their comments and is on the other hand, seeing the matter in a different perspective: to the audience, their comments might be mere comments which purpose are to provide insights on improving the presentation; to the scientist, there is a psychological occurrence that allows him to see the comments as personal attacks that threaten his self-image. To effectively deal with such instances, the sender and the receiver must first try to understand their positions in the communication process. More importantly, they should be able to understand both parties’ underlying interests, that is, the reason beyond each position. Understanding the self, and the other party’s interests should, however, not be done in a judgmental manner. The person should neither approve, nor disapprove because taking sides would affect the perception of the other which could distort messages and prevent effective communication. Some people, for example, would feel conscious and less open when they feel that the other disagrees in their thoughts. What is important in communication is that information is gathered so that better understanding of one another’s position is achieved. Open-mindedness allows a person to become more flexible in seeing different perspectives that would also allow for better understanding (Wilcox, 2002). Conclusion Effective communication can be achieved first by understanding the theories related to it. In understanding these theories, one will be able to gain knowledge of the events that could possibly be happening in oneself or the other person’s psyche. In gaining such knowledge, the person would be able to adapt himself to certain situations to drive the communication process in to more effective outcomes instead of what negative result misunderstandings could produce. Works Cited Boeree, G. (2002). Emotion. Retrieved 04 Jan 2007 from http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/emotions.html. Doyle, T. (2005). Self-concept. Novaonline. Retrieved 04 Jan 2007 from http://novaonline.nvcc.edu/eli/spd110td/interper/self/self.html Emotion. (2003). In AllPsych. Retrieved 12:02, January 4, 2007, from http://allpsych.com/psychology101/emotion.html Honors, C. (2001). Communication Capstone: Spring 2001 Theory Workbook. Retrieved 04 Jan 2007 from http://www.uky.edu/~drlane/capstone/interpersonal/. King, D. (2000). Four Principles of Interpersonal Communication. Retrieved 04 Jan 2007 from http://www.pstcc.edu/facstaff/dking/interpr.htm. Self-concept. (2001). In Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology. Retrieved 10:55, January 4, 2007, from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_g2699/is_0003/ai_2699000306. Theories of Perception in Psychology. (n.d.). In Simply Psychology. Retrieved 10:54, January 4, 2007, from http://www.simplypsychology.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/perception-theories.html Wilcox, L. (2002). Guidelines for Interpersonal Communication. Harvard Medical School. Retrieved 04 Jan 2007 from http://www.hms.harvard.edu/ombuds/techniques/index.html. Read More